| a |
Rules for the design of study plans within the study programme |
The Mechanical Technology study program takes into account the main mission, but also the goals set by the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering of the University of Žilina in Žilina in the field of science and research (from page 17 in the Long-Term Plan of SjF UNIZA) and especially in the field of education (from page 11 in the Long-Term Plan of SjF UNIZA). https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/fstroj/pdf/DlhodobyZamer/DZ_SjF_UNIZA_2021_2027.pdf
The study program was formed/innovated in the intentions of the development trends of such focused study programs in Europe and the world, taking into account the attractiveness for high school students. At the same time, it was created in accordance with the needs of practice, and therefore one of the main points of view when designing profile subjects was the aspect of applicability of knowledge and competences in real practice.
In terms of the objectives (p. 11 of the Long-term plan of SjF UNIZA), the study program of Engineering Technology and its study plan were compiled in such a way that students are involved in solving science and research tasks at SjF UNIZA (e.g. projects VEGA, APVV, Grant system UNIZA, KEGA etc.); that students' independence, autonomy and responsibility for their education are supported, while respecting the diversity of students and their needs; and at the same time so that students during their studies on this study program can also complete a part of their studies abroad (e.g. within the framework of ERASMUS+, NSP programs, etc.), in which the department providing the SP and SjF UNIZA have rich experience and a wide network of partner universities.
The ensuring workplace carries out continuous research activities in the field of study at the national and international level. From the point of view of the transformation of the outputs in both the pedagogical and scientific research areas, in this context we can especially mention cooperating workplaces - e.g. development institute Nemak, Linz Austria, Akademia görnizco hutnicza Krakow,, Polytechnic Czestochowa, Polytechnic Silesia, Polytechnic Swietokrzyska, Polytechnic Gliwice, Polytechnic Lódzska, Academy of Sciences Poland - Katowice Branch, Czech Technical University Prague, BUT Brno, TU VŠB Ostrava, TU Pardubice, ZČU Pilsen, Sieć Badawcza Łukasiewicz - Krakowski Instytut Technologiczny, Politechnika Rzeszow, etc.
As part of the cooperation, exchange internships of workers, students and doctoral students are implemented, joint book publications, scientific and professional articles are published, international projects are implemented and prepared, and projects are solved within the framework of bilateral scientific and research cooperation. Together with AGH Kraków and TU VŠB Ostrava, it has been organized since 1993 international scientific conference of Polish, Czech and Slovak casters WSPÓLPRACA-SPOLUPÁCE-SPOLUPRÁCA.
Profile subjects of the study program (compulsory or mandatory optional) are set so that the student, after completing them, acquires knowledge or skills that are essential for completing the doctoral study program in Mechanical Technologies. Profile subjects represent the theoretical and methodological basis in the relevant field of education - i.e. j. in the field of engineering technologies and materials. Research of new materials and technologies; testing and testing of modern advanced materials intended for applications (not only) in the transport industry in order to use the boundary properties of materials in all areas of their applications; development, research and modeling of the useful properties of materials and new methods of evaluating the resistance of materials to mechanical, physical and chemical stress is one of the supporting directions of SjF.
In accordance with the Dublin descriptors and at the same time in accordance with the national qualification framework, graduates of the doctoral program in Mechanical Technology will obtain the 8th level of qualification (SKKR 8).
Detailed rules for creating study plans in the study program are described in the UNIZA guideline no. 203 - Rules for creating recommended study plans of SP at the University of Žilina in Žilina: hhttps://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/EN/smernica-UNIZA-c-203-en.pdf
In the framework of harmonisation with the VSK UNIZA formalised processes this programme was worked out and submitted in compliance with the Directive No. 222, article 16, items 4, 5 and 9. According to the Directive No. 204 it is subordinated to the SAAVŠ standards from the study programme (part 4) - articles 10 and 11.
In the whole process the persons assessing and approving the study programme (an authority from practice, Scientific Council of Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and UNIZA Accreditation Council) are not the same as those preparing the study programme proposal for harmonisation. The nomination of the members to individual structures is recorded in the minutes from meetings from the Dean´s Collegium a individual members were appointed by the Dean of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering. The lists of the members of the individual structures are known and accessible at: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php/akreditacia/studijne-programy/phd (in Slovak) and https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php/en/education/studies/study-programs-ph-d
At the university level the Directive No. 222 defines the policies, structures and processes connected with the complex internal quality management system regarding to the fulfilment of the missions and aims of UNIZA and the achievement of the missions and aims of UNIZA and creating harmony with the VSK UNIZA with the SAAVŠ standards. The internal quality management system at UNIZA - https://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/EN/smernica-UNIZA-c-222-en.pdf is as follows:
- The policies: Directive No. 222, article 7;
- The structures: Directive No. 222, article 10; Directive No. 210 - Statute of UNIZA Accreditation Council; Directive No. 214 - Structures of Internal Quality Management;
- The processes: Directive No. 222, article 16.
Except for the aforementioned Directive No. 222 the following Directive No.s define further procedures connected with the proposal of the new study programme or proposal of adaptation of the study programme:
|
| b |
Recommended study plans for individual study paths |
Detailed rules for creating study plans in the study program are described in the UNIZA guideline no. 203 - Rules for creating recommended study plans of SP at the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/EN/smernica-UNIZA-c-203-en.pdf
Mechanical engineering study program: the recommended study plan and standard length of study are regulated according to the Higher Education Act. In accordance with the study regulations of the faculty, the study program complies with the rules of the European system of transfer and collection of credits and the student's workload for the academic year. Follows the set workload expressed by the number of hours of contact teaching together with all the activities necessary to prepare and pass the subject. For individual subjects, the number of credits was determined in such a way that they take into account the difficulty of the subject in terms of the specific subject area and the method of completion of the subject. Subjects within the recommended study plan enable the achievement of specified educational outcomes.
|
| c |
The study programme, in the structure of compulsory, compulsory optional and optional courses
Profile courses of the relevant study path (specialization) within the study programme - Appendix 1 |
| d |
Number of credits, the achievement of which is a condition for proper completion of studies |
| 180 |
| Other requirements that the student must meet within the study programme and for its proper completion, including the requirements for state examinations, rules for re-study and rules for the extension, interruption of study |
The structure of the doctoral study program Mechanical Technologies from the point of view of content as well as from the point of view of the number of credits obtained meets the requirements arising from the description of the study field of Mechanical Engineering. The number of credits assigned to the subjects forming the core of the study field is 180 out of 180 credits, i.e. j. the proposed composition of compulsory and compulsory optional subjects of the study program fulfills 100% agreement with the core knowledge of the department.
The representation and structure of other proposed mandatory, mandatory elective and optional subjects creates conditions for a deeper profiling of doctoral degree graduates.
Proper completion of studies is governed by Directive no. 110 Study regulations for the third degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_110.pdf in PART III as follows:
Dissertation:
Art. 10: Application for permission to defend dissertations
- The doctoral student submits an application to the dean for permission to defend the dissertation in accordance with the study schedule, if he has obtained the prescribed number of credits. In exceptional cases, the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will determine in writing an alternative deadline for the doctoral student to submit an application for permission to defend the dissertation so that the study does not exceed its standard length determined by the accredited study program in the field of study by more than 2 years.
- The doctoral student shall attach to the application:
a) dissertation in written form in four copies,
b) auto-abstract of the dissertation in written and electronic form (Article 11),
c) supervisor's review on the dissertation, which mainly includes an assessment of the doctoral student's contribution to the acquisition of new knowledge in science, the possibilities of their use and the characteristics of the doctoral student,
d) opinion of the department/university-wide workplace or external educational institution, prepared on the basis of the internal defense of the dissertation,
e) a list of published works with full bibliographic data and unpublished scientific works or public and private exhibitions of works of art and performances of the doctoral student as well as their responses,
f) justification of the differences between the original and submitted dissertation, if the doctoral student submits a new dissertation after an unsuccessful defense in the same doctoral study program,
g) confirmation of the submission of the dissertation in electronic form to the Record of Final Thesis (EZP),
h) originality control protocol,
i) completed and signed "License Agreement on the use of school work.
Art. 15: Defense of the dissertation
The dissertation together with its defense form one subject. The defense of the dissertation is a state exam and in the standard length of study, the doctoral student must complete it no later than the last month of the last academic year of his standard length of study. The defense of the dissertation in the above-standard length of study must take place no later than two years after the end of the standard length of study). During this period, a doctoral student in the full-time form of doctoral studies is not entitled to a scholarship, he continues to fulfill his duties at his place of work and pays tuition for the extra-standard length of study.
(2) The dean ensures that the defense of the dissertation takes place within the set deadline.
(3) The chairman of the defense commission will send the opponent's reviews to the opponents, members of the commission, including the supervisor, the doctoral student and the department or the external educational institution that published the topic.
(4) The defense of the dissertation is public, in exceptional cases the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs the rector can declare it non-public; if its public defense would endanger a secret protected by a special law.
(5) The defense of the dissertation takes place in the form of a scientific debate. The doctoral student will present the content of his dissertation, results and benefits. Opponents will present their opinions, on which the doctoral student will take a position. The discussion verifies the correctness, justification and scientific originality of the knowledge contained in the dissertation.
(6) The defense can only be held in the presence of at least two thirds of the number of members of the defense commission entitled to vote, including at least two opponents, while at least one member of the commission must be from a workplace outside UNIZA. In case topic 4. Structure and content of the study program was announced by an external educational institution, a committee member from this external educational institution must be present.
(7) If, for serious reasons, the doctoral student is unable to participate in the defense at the appointed time, he must apologize in advance to the dean and also to the chairman of the defense committee. In such a case, the dean, in agreement with the chairman of the defense committee, will determine an alternative date for the defense and notify its participants.
(8) After the end of the defense, a closed session of the commission is held, in which its members, including the opponents and the trainer, will participate. At a closed session, the course and result of the defense and the possibility of using the results of the dissertation in practice will be evaluated. At the same time, the committee and the opponents will decide in a secret vote whether the committee proposes to award the doctoral student an academic title. Subsequently, the committee evaluates the defense of the dissertation with a grade, while the classification is carried out according to the classification scale, which consists of six classification levels:
| Grade |
Word classification and its definition |
Range of knowledge (%) |
Numeric value |
| A |
Excellent (excellent results)
|
93 - 100 |
1 |
| B |
Very good (above average results)
|
85 - 92 |
1,5 |
| C |
Good (average results)
|
77 - 84 |
2 |
| D |
Satisfactory (acceptable results)
|
69 - 76 |
2,5 |
| E |
Sufficient (results meet minimum criteria)
|
61 - 68 |
3 |
| FX |
Insufficient (further work required)
|
less than 61 |
4 |
In case the committee decides not to award an academic degree, the evaluation of the defense is FX.
(9) The presence of at least two-thirds of the members of the defense commission, including at least two opponents, is required for a valid decision on the outcome of the dissertation defense. In order to successfully complete the defense of the dissertation, the doctoral student must obtain a majority of the positive votes of the present members of the committee for the defense of the dissertation and opponents.
(10) Minutes are written about the defense, which are signed by the chairman of the commission for the defense, the members of the commission present and the opponents.
(11) The chairman of the defense commission will announce the result of the vote with justification to the doctoral student and other participants present at its public session.
(12) The proposal for awarding or not awarding an academic title to a doctoral student together with the minutes and file material of the doctoral student shall be submitted by the chairman of the defense commission to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs to the rector. (13) The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will determine in writing an alternative date for the defense of the dissertation in the same study program to a doctoral student who, based on the result of the dissertation defense or due to his unjustified non-participation in the defense, the defense committee has proposed not to award an academic degree.
(14) The defense of the dissertation can be repeated only once, no later than two years from the end of the standard length of study. (15) The public part of the dissertation defense is considered public even if the faculty/university-wide workplace ensures its public direct transmission, or during a crisis situation, it will make its audio recording available to the public for listening in the premises of the faculty/university-wide workplace for three months from the end of the crisis situation.
(16) In times of crisis, the defense of the dissertation can be conducted via video conference or other means of information and communication technology without physical presence.
Art. 16: Deciding on the award of an academic title.
(1) After a positive assessment of the thesis defense committee's proposal for awarding or not awarding the academic title "Doctor" or "Doctor of Arts" to a graduate of doctoral studies, the dean shall submit to the rector the documents on completion of the studies. (2) The academic title "doctor" ("philosophiae doctor", abbreviated "PhD.") is awarded by UNIZA with effect from the day of the successful defense of the dissertation.
(3) The dean shall send the doctoral student a written notice of the granting or non-granting of the academic title.
Art. 17: Proof of graduation.
(1) Evidence of completion of a doctoral study program in a field of study is a university diploma, a certificate of state examination and an addendum to the diploma.
(2) As a rule, the dean will hand over the documents of completion of studies to the doctoral student at the graduation ceremony, organized according to the traditions and customs of UNIZA. In times of crisis, documents can be submitted in an alternative way.
In case the committee decides not to award an academic degree, the evaluation of the defense is FX.
(9) The presence of at least two-thirds of the members of the defense commission, including at least two opponents, is required for a valid decision on the outcome of the dissertation defense. In order to successfully complete the defense of the dissertation, the doctoral student must obtain a majority of the positive votes from the present members of the committee for the defense of the dissertation and opponents.
(10) Minutes are written about the defense, which are signed by the chairman of the commission for the defense, the members of the commission present and the opponents.
(11) The chairman of the defense commission will announce the result of the vote with justification to the doctoral student and other participants present at its public session.
(12) The proposal for awarding or not awarding an academic title to a doctoral student together with the minutes and file material of the doctoral student shall be submitted by the chairman of the defense commission to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs to the rector. (13) The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will determine in writing an alternative date for the defense of the dissertation in the same study program to a doctoral student who, based on the result of the dissertation defense or due to his unjustified non-participation in the defense, the defense committee has proposed not to award an academic degree.
(14) The defense of the dissertation can be repeated only once, no later than two years from the end of the standard length of study. (15) The public part of the dissertation defense is considered public even if the faculty/university-wide workplace ensures its public direct transmission, or during a crisis situation, it will make its audio recording available to the public for listening in the premises of the faculty/university-wide workplace for three months from the end of the crisis situation.
(16) In times of crisis, the defense of the dissertation can be conducted via video conference or other means of information and communication technology without physical presence.
Art. 16: Deciding on the award of an academic title.
(1) After a positive assessment of the thesis defense committee's proposal for awarding or not awarding the academic title "Doctor" or "Doctor of Arts" to a graduate of doctoral studies, the dean shall submit to the rector the documents on completion of the studies. (2) The academic title "doctor" ("philosophiae doctor", abbreviated "PhD.") is awarded by UNIZA with effect from the day of the successful defense of the dissertation.
(3) The dean shall send the doctoral student a written notice of the granting or non-granting of the academic title.
Art. 17: Proof of graduation.
(1) Evidence of completion of a doctoral study program in a field of study is a university diploma, a certificate of state examination and an addendum to the diploma.
(2) As a rule, the dean will hand over the documents of completion of studies to the doctoral student at the graduation ceremony, organized according to the traditions and customs of UNIZA. In times of crisis, documents can be submitted in an alternative way.
In case the committee decides not to award an academic degree, the evaluation of the defense is FX.
(9) The presence of at least two-thirds of the members of the defense commission, including at least two opponents, is required for a valid decision on the outcome of the dissertation defense. In order to successfully complete the defense of the dissertation, the doctoral student must obtain a majority of the positive votes from the present members of the committee for the defense of the dissertation and opponents.
(10) Minutes are written about the defense, which are signed by the chairman of the commission for the defense, the members of the commission present and the opponents.
(11) The chairman of the defense commission will announce the result of the vote with justification to the doctoral student and other participants present at its public session.
(12) The proposal for awarding or not awarding an academic title to a doctoral student together with the minutes and file material of the doctoral student shall be submitted by the chairman of the defense commission to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs to the rector. (13) The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will determine in writing an alternative date for the defense of the dissertation in the same study program to a doctoral student who, based on the result of the dissertation defense or due to his unjustified non-participation in the defense, the defense committee has proposed not to award an academic degree.
(14) The defense of the dissertation can be repeated only once, no later than two years from the end of the standard length of study. (15) The public part of the dissertation defense is considered public even if the faculty/university-wide workplace ensures its public direct transmission, or during a crisis situation, it will make its audio recording available to the public for listening in the premises of the faculty/university-wide workplace for three months from the end of the crisis situation.
(16) In times of crisis, the defense of the dissertation can be conducted via video conference or other means of information and communication technology without physical presence.
Art. 16: Deciding on the award of an academic title.
(1) After a positive assessment of the thesis defense committee's proposal for awarding or not awarding the academic title "Doctor" or "Doctor of Arts" to a graduate of doctoral studies, the dean shall submit to the rector the documents on completion of the studies. (2) The academic title "doctor" ("philosophiae doctor", abbreviated "PhD.") is awarded by UNIZA with effect from the day of the successful defense of the dissertation.
(3) The dean shall send the doctoral student a written notice of the granting or non-granting of the academic title.
Art. 17: Proof of graduation.
(1) Evidence of completion of a doctoral study program in a field of study is a university diploma, a certificate of state examination and an addendum to the diploma.
(2) As a rule, the dean will hand over the documents of completion of studies to the doctoral student at the graduation ceremony, organized according to the traditions and customs of UNIZA. In times of crisis, documents can be submitted in an alternative way. |
| e |
For individual study plans, the institution states the requirements for completing the individual parts of the study programme and the student's progress within the study programme in the given structure |
| number of credits for compulsory courses required for proper completion of studies/completion of a part of studies |
1 r.: 35.0, 2 r.: 60.0, 3 r.: 60.0, |
| number of credits for compulsory optional courses required for the proper completion of studies/completion of a part of studies |
1r.:30, 2r.0.03.r.0.0 |
| number of credits for optional courses required for the proper completion of studies/completion of a part of studies |
is not relevant |
| number of credits required for the completion of studies/completion of a part of the studies for the common foundations and for the relevant specialization, in the case of a teaching combination study programme or a translation combination study programme |
is not relevant |
| number of credits for the final thesis and the defense of the final thesis required for the proper completion of studies |
15 |
| number of credits for professional practice required for the proper completion of studies/completion of a part of studies |
is not relevant |
| number of credits required for the proper completion of studies/completion of a part of the studies for project work with the indication of relevant courses in engineering study programmes |
75: Dissertation project 1, Dissertation project 2, Dissertation project 3, Dissertation project 4, Dissertation thesis |
| number of credits required for the proper completion of studies/completion of a part of the studies for artistic performances in addition to the final thesis in art study programmes |
is not relevant |
| f |
Rules for the verification of learning outcomes, students’ assessment and the possibilities of appealing against the assessment |
At the UNIZA level, the processes, procedures and structures for the verification of educational outcomes and student evaluation and the possibility of corrective procedures for this evaluation are defined by Directive No. 110 Study regulations for the third degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_110.pdf, Article 5 Credit system of doctoral studies and evaluation of study results.
Credit system of doctoral studies and assessment of study results:
(1) The credit system is applied in both forms of doctoral study in accordance with the approved credit system of the faculty/university-wide workplace.
(2) Credits are numerical values ??assigned to subjects, expressing the amount of work required to acquire the prescribed educational results. The standard load of a student for the entire academic year in full-time study is expressed by the number of 60 credits, 30 credits per semester and 20 credits per trimester. The standard load of a student for the entire academic year in an external form of study is expressed by the number of no more than 48 credits, depending on the standard length of study of the relevant study program and the number of credits required for its proper completion.
(3) During his studies, a doctoral student generally receives credits for the following activities:
- a) attending specialized doctoral lectures and seminars according to the study plan of the doctoral student,
- b) successfully passing the dissertation exam,
- c) pedagogic activity in the form of daily study in the scope of no more than 4 hours per week; in the external form of study, the obligation to deliver elective lectures and the performance of other professional activities,
- d) independent activity in the field of scientific research and pedagogy (publishing with an emphasis on outputs in high-impact journals, included in international indexed databases, active co-investigation of scientific tasks, etc., management of ŠVOČ theses, final theses of bachelor's studies, etc.),
- e) acceptance of the dissertation for defense.
(4) The activities referred to in par. 3 are mutually irreplaceable.
(5) Credit system and number of credits for individual activities according to par. 3 is approved by the scientific council of the faculty/in the case of university-wide study programs, the Scientific Council of UNIZA.
(6) The credit system of the faculty/university-wide workplace determines the number of credits that the doctoral student must obtain for:
- a) progression to the next year of study,
- b) registering for the dissertation exam,
- c) submitting an application for permission to defend a dissertation,
- d) recognition of other activities according to the doctoral student's individual study plan.
(7) If the doctoral student completed a part of his studies at a training institution other than the designated one (e.g. abroad), the credits obtained at this institution are counted in full, if he was sent to this institution as part of his study plan, and if they are for credit systems of the sending and receiving workplace compatible, or determined in advance (transfer of credits).
(8) If there is a change in the study program in the field of study, the credits earned up to that point can be recognized for the doctoral student, if it is in accordance with his new study plan.
(9) The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector decides on the transfer or the granting of credits (according to paragraph 7).
(10) Forms of verification of acquired knowledge, skills and competences during studies are determined by the study plan of the doctoral student and the annual evaluation of the doctoral student. subject information sheet (conditions for passing the subject). The verification of the acquired knowledge, skills and competences of the study part is usually verified by an oral exam. Methods and forms are given in the information sheets of the subjects.
The evaluation of the doctoral student's study results results from the evaluation of the fulfillment of the doctoral student's study plan:
- The doctoral student's study plan is developed as an individual study plan.
- The doctoral student's study plan consists of a study part that ends with a dissertation exam, a scientific part and a defense of the dissertation. If it is a doctoral student who is registered for a dissertation topic listed by an external educational institution, part of the agreement of the faculty/university-wide workplace with this institution is also where and in what way the study part of the plan, pedagogical and other professional activities of the doctoral student will take place.
- The study part of the doctoral student's study plan mainly consists of participation in lectures, seminars and individual study of professional literature in individual years of study according to the focus of the dissertation, for which the supervisor allocates credits in accordance with the credit system of the study.
- The individual study plan of the doctoral student contains a list of subjects, including a professional foreign language in the scope of two semesters, which the doctoral student must complete, a list of subjects for the dissertation exam selected from the list approved by the departmental committee, or by the working group or SOK and a list of mandatory and recommended literature that the doctoral student should study as part of his individual preparation for the dissertation exam. The doctoral student's individual study plan also contains the dates in which the doctoral student must complete individual subjects and the dissertation exam.
- The scientific part of the doctoral student's study plan consists of individual or team scientific work of the doctoral student, which is related to the topic of the dissertation. The scientific part of the doctoral student's study plan is professionally guaranteed by the supervisor.
- An integral part of the doctoral student's activities, prescribed in the study plan, is the active participation of the doctoral student in international conferences, especially those indexed in international databases (WOS, SCOPUS) and publication in scientific journals. It is recommended to include in the doctoral student's study plan the obligation to publish in at least one impact journal that has an assigned quartile in WOS.
- As a rule, an integral part of the doctoral student's activities in the daily form of study, prescribed in the study plan, is the active participation of the doctoral student in a foreign stay at the partner workplace of the doctoral student's training institution. It is recommended to include in the doctoral student's study plan the completion of a stay abroad lasting at least two months, or one semester.
- If a doctoral student in the full-time or external form of doctoral studies during the academic year grossly neglects the obligations arising from the individual study plan, the dean of the faculty/in the case of a university-wide workplace, the rector, based on the supervisor's proposal, after the approval of the union committee, or of the working group or SOK to exclude a doctoral student from doctoral studies (§ 66, paragraph 1, letter c) of the Law on Higher Education), while the decision on exclusion from studies takes effect on the day of delivery, or on the day of return of the parcel by post (§ 66 par. 2 Z o VŠ).
Completion of the subject is classified by grade. The grade expresses the result of the assessment in accordance with the aim and content of the subject, as well as the learning outcomes listed in the information sheet of the subject, as well as the student's ability to apply the acquired knowledge. The student must demonstrate competence, which is the result of a complex of knowledge, skills and attitudes acquired by the student through formal and informal education and informal learning in the course of gaining his own practical experience. Competencies together with knowledge and skills serve as structural characteristics of the learning outcomes for the subject.
The grade assessment is carried out according to the classification scale, which consists of six classification levels:
| Grade |
Word classification and its definition |
Range of knowledge (%) |
Numeric value |
| A |
Excellent (excellent results) |
93 - 100 |
1 |
| B |
Very good (above average results) |
85 - 92 |
1,5 |
| C |
Good (average results) |
77 - 84 |
2 |
| D |
Satisfactory (acceptable results) |
69 - 76 |
2,5 |
| E |
Sufficient (results meet minimum criteria) |
61 - 68 |
3 |
| FX |
Insufficient (further work required) |
less than 61 |
4 |
The grade and verbal evaluation (A-FX) is used to record in the electronic study report (electronic index), the grade is entered by the examiner in AIVS no later than 24 hours after the exam with the date of the exam. A student will receive credits for a subject if his results have been graded with one of the grades from A to E.
Annual evaluation of the doctoral student:
No later than August 31 for the relevant academic year, the supervisor submits an annual evaluation of the fulfillment of the doctoral student's study program to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, to the rector, stating whether or not he or she recommends his/her continuation of studies. The supervisor evaluates the status and level of completion of the doctoral student's study program, compliance with deadlines, awards credits and, if necessary, submits a proposal to modify his individual study program. The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector decides on the basis of the annual evaluation of the doctoral student whether the doctoral student can continue his studies, as well as any changes in his study program.
Dissertation exam:
(1) A doctoral student in full-time doctoral studies registers for the dissertation examination as a rule within 12 months, but no later than 18 months from the date of registration for doctoral studies, a doctoral student in external form no later than 36 months from the date of registration for doctoral studies. The doctoral student is obliged to submit, together with the application form for the dissertation examination, a written work prepared for the dissertation examination. Failure of a doctoral student to meet the conditions for registering for a dissertation exam, or not submitting a written work for a dissertation exam within the set deadline without the prior approval of the head of the training institution, is grounds for his/her exclusion from studies.
(2) The written work for the dissertation exam consists of a dissertation project, containing an overview of the current state of knowledge on the given topic, an outline of the theoretical foundations of its future solution and an analysis of the methodological approach to solving the given issue. The written work for the dissertation exam will be evaluated by one opponent.
(3) The opponent of the written work for the dissertation exam is appointed by the dean of the faculty/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector at the suggestion of the supervisor. Only an expert with an academic PhD degree can be an opponent. (or its older equivalent), or the scientific rank of DrSc., who does not work at the same faculty/university-wide workplace or the same external educational institution as the doctoral student and does not share publications with him.
(4) The dissertation examination consists of a part consisting of a discussion of the written work for the dissertation examination and a part in which the doctoral student must demonstrate theoretical knowledge in the specified subjects of the dissertation examination. Exams from individual subjects can also be taken by a doctoral student during the study part of the doctoral studies before the discussion on the written work for the dissertation exam at the suggestion of the supervisor with the approval of the chairman of the OK, or chairman of the working group or SOK. In such a case, the exam is held before the committee with the participation of the teacher of the subject, the trainer (in justified cases, a person authorized by him) and two other members without the presence of the opponent. Completion of individual subjects is evaluated with a grade, while the evaluation is carried out according to a classification scale made up of six classification levels. The examiner will enter the grade without undue delay in the exam protocol, in the study report and in the UNIZA electronic information system.
(5) The dissertation examination is held before the examination committee, whose chairman and members are appointed by the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector, based on the proposal of the chairman of the departmental committee, or chairman of the working group or SOK. The committee has at least four members, at least one of whom is not from the workplace where the doctoral student works. At least one member of the commission must have a scientific-pedagogical title of professor or must have a scientific-pedagogical title of docent and perform the function of a professor, or must perform the function of a visiting professor, or have the scientific rank of doctor of sciences, or must be a researcher with a recognized scientific qualification level I. or IIa. The other members of the commission must have an academic degree of PhD, or its older equivalent. The supervisor of the doctoral student is a member of the committee and participates in the dissertation examination without the right to vote on the outcome of the examination. The opponent is a member of the examination committee and has the right to vote when deciding on the outcome of the dissertation examination. If the opponent submitted a negative opinion, his participation is a condition for holding the dissertation exam. In the event that the topic was announced by an external educational institution, one member of the committee is from this external educational institution.
(6) For a valid decision on the result of the dissertation examination, the presence of the majority of the members of the examination committee is required, while the examiners of subjects that were not taken during the course of study must be present. If any of the examiners cannot participate in the exam for serious reasons, the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will decide on his/her representation. The examination board decides on the result of the examination in a closed session. In order to successfully complete the dissertation examination, the doctoral student must receive an overwhelming majority of positive votes from the members of the examination committee present.
(7) The overall result of the dissertation examination is assessed comprehensively by the examination committee with the expression "passed" or "failed".
(8) Minutes are made of the dissertation examination, where at the end the committee will state its recommendation, or proposal to modify theses and the title of the dissertation. The minutes also include the opinion of the opponent of the written work. The minutes are signed by the chairman and the present members of the examination committee.
(9) The dissertation exam is one of the state exams and is public. The faculty/university-wide workplace will prepare a state examination certificate for the doctoral student, which will then be issued by UNIZA.
(10) If, for serious reasons, the doctoral student is unable to participate in the dissertation examination on the appointed date and apologizes in advance to the chairman of the examination committee, the chairman of the committee may assign him an alternative date. Withdrawal from the exam or unexcused absence of the doctoral student from the exam is evaluated with the expression "failed".
(11) A doctoral student who failed the examination may repeat the examination only once, at the earliest after the expiration of three months from the date of the unsuccessful dissertation examination on the date determined by the chairman of the examination committee. Repeated failure in the dissertation exam is grounds for expulsion from doctoral studies.
(12) The public part of the dissertation examination is considered public even if the faculty/university-wide workplace ensures its public direct transmission, or during a crisis situation, it will make its audio recording available to the public for listening in the premises of the faculty/university-wide workplace for three months from the end of the crisis situation.
(13) In times of crisis, the dissertation exam can be conducted via video conference or other means of information and communication technology without physical presence. |
| g |
Conditions for the recognition of studies or a part of studies |
At the university level, changes during doctoral studies are defined by Directive no. 110: Study schedule for the 3rd degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina:
https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_110.pdf, PART IV CHANGES DURING DOCTORAL STUDIES
Change of the study program in the field of study, change of supervisor
(1) A change of the study program in the field of study, supervisor or training workplace within UNIZA can be made during doctoral studies in justified cases, especially if this creates more favorable conditions for studying the doctoral student's study program.
(2) The dean of the faculty/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector decides on the change of the study program in the field of study based on the written request of the doctoral student and after the statement of the supervisor. In the event that the topic was listed by an external educational institution, the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will do so after the statement of the supervisor and the statutory representative of this external educational institution.
(3) The proportional part of the duration of the completed study program in the field of study before the change of the study program in the field of study is included in the duration of doctoral studies.
(4) When changing the study program in the field of study, the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will decide on the recognition of the doctoral student's dissertation examination and the subjects of the study part completed before this change.
Interruption and termination of doctoral studies
(1) A doctoral student may, in both the standard and the extra-standard length of study, request that his doctoral studies be interrupted (even repeatedly) due to maternity leave, health reasons, due to his study stay abroad, which is not part of his individual study plan, or other serious reasons. During the interruption of studies, the doctoral student loses the rights and obligations of a student. The supervisor comments on the doctoral student's request to interrupt his studies.
(2) Interruption of studies is permitted by the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector. For a doctoral student who has applied for a dissertation topic listed by an external educational institution, he will do so only after a positive statement from the statutory representative of the external educational institution.
(3) As a rule, the total time of interruption of doctoral studies does not exceed 18 months. In special, justified cases, e.g. during the next maternity leave, the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector may decide to suspend doctoral studies for a longer period of time, but not more than 36 months.
(4) Doctoral studies end with the defense of the dissertation, or with leaving the study, failure to finish the study within the set deadline, expulsion from the study, cancellation of the study program in the field of study, death of the student. |
| h |
Topics of final theses of the study programme (or a link to the list) |
The list of dissertation topics is available at: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php/uchadzaci/moznosti-studia/doktorandskestudium. |
| i |
Rules for the assignment, processing, opposition, defence and evaluation of final theses in the study programme; list of the supervisors of final theses with the assignment to topics (indicating the contact details) |
The rules for submitting, processing, opposing, defending and evaluating theses are defined in Directive no. 110 Study regulations for the third degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_110.pdf. and Directive no. 215 About final, rigorous and habilitation theses under the conditions of the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/EN/smernica-UNIZA-c-215-en.pdf
The final thesis verifies the knowledge, skills and competencies that the student acquired during his studies and his ability to use them in solving tasks and specific problems related to the field of study. The final work is a dissertation in the third year of higher education.
By means of a dissertation, a student of the third degree of higher education demonstrates the ability and readiness for independent scientific and creative activity in the field of research or development or for independent theoretical and creative artistic activity. The work presents the results of scientific research and the application of research results in practice. The result of the dissertation should be the acquisition of new knowledge in the given issue. Scientific research is the process of acquiring new scientific knowledge and expanding the boundaries of human knowledge. The student must demonstrate a deep systematic understanding of the field of study, must demonstrate skills in research work and correctly apply scientific research methods. The student must prove that he himself carried out a substantial part of the research within the dissertation, that he outlined, constructed, realized, optimized it, and all this in an ethically clean manner.
Submission of the final thesis:
The topics of the final theses as well as their assignments are proposed by the individual training workplaces of UNIZA.
Theses topics can also be proposed by representatives of external partners from practice or students. These topics are the subject of discussion within the final training workplace and trade union committee, respectively. of the working group and are listed if these proposals correspond to the study program and professional focus of the training workplace. Subsequently, in the case of final theses, the accepted proposal of the topic can be assigned a supervisor from an external partner from practice and a consultant from the training workplace, an assignment will be prepared in the same form as for topics proposed by the training workplace.
Proposals for dissertation topics are listed and published on the official board of the website of the faculty, which also publishes the method and dates of students' registration for studies. The date of publication of dissertation topics is determined by the academic calendar of the training institution.
No later than two months before the last day for submitting applications for doctoral studies, the dean of the relevant faculty will list the topics of the dissertations that can be applied for as part of the admissions procedure. Dissertation topics on the proposal of supervisors after the prior approval of the chairman of the trade union committee, or the chairman of the working group or SOK is approved by the dean. If it is a topic listed by an external educational institution, it will also state the name of this institution. The name of the study program, the name of the supervisor, the form of study (full-time, part-time), the deadline for submitting applications and the date of the admission procedure are indicated for each listed topic. The topics of the dissertations together with the mentioned requirements are published on the official bulletin board and in a mass manner according to a special regulation.
Management and preparation of the final thesis:
Dissertation supervisors can be professors, associate professors and other experts approved by the Scientific Council of UNIZA or the scientific council of the faculty, if doctoral studies are carried out at the faculty. The supervisor specifies the solution to the topic of the final thesis, its scope, recommends study and information resources, guides the student in processing the topic, assesses the final thesis and the student's approach to the preparation of the thesis, also comments on the degree of originality of the final thesis in his written assessment and classifies the thesis.
The head of the department, where the topic was assigned, will designate an opponent for each final work, and if necessary, a consultant, specialist trainer or internal tutor. They will be appointed from the ranks of professors, docents, assistant professors working in the field of study, scientific research workers (also outside UNIZA) and important experts with the necessary practical qualifications. In the case of bachelor theses, opponents can also be doctoral students. The opponent of the final thesis assesses, evaluates and classifies the final thesis in his written assessment.
For assessment, evaluation and classification of dissertations, the dean of the faculty appoints, in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector, on the proposal of the chairman of the departmental committee, or the chairman of the working group of at least two opponents.
The requirements of the dissertation are governed by Directive no. 110 Study regulations for the third degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_110.pdf), Art. 11:
The doctoral student submits a dissertation for defense in the Slovak language. With the written consent of the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector may submit a dissertation in a language other than Slovak. As a dissertation, a doctoral student can also submit his own published work or a set of his own published works, the content of which elaborates on the topic of the dissertation and corresponds to the theses (project) of the dissertation. If the doctoral student submits a set of his own publications, he will supplement it with a detailed introduction, in which he explains the current state of the issue, the goals of the dissertation and the conclusions that arose from solving the topic of the dissertation. If the attached publications are the work of several authors, the doctoral student shall also attach a statement of the co-authors on his authorship share.
The dissertation contains an introduction, a description of the objectives, an analysis of the current state of the issue at home and abroad, theoretical starting points, a detailed description of the procedures used (work methods, materials), achieved results, their evaluation, discussions and conclusions indicating what new knowledge is needed for the further development of science , techniques and practice the work brings, a list of used literature and appendices.
The training institution can issue its own methodology for the content of the dissertation.
If the dissertation is part of a collective work, the doctoral student will state his own results and put them in context with the results of other members of the collective in the discussion. An electronic or printed copy of the dissertation is archived in the University Library of UNIZA, including the abstract and the license agreement, in which the permitted level of publication is established.
Abstract of the dissertation:
The doctoral student prepares an auto-abstract of the dissertation (hereinafter referred to as "auto-abstract"), which is a brief summary of the results, contributions of the dissertation and data on its response. If the dissertation is a set of works, an exact list of them shall be given in the abstract. The abstract is in A5 format, while its scope is usually 20-30 pages and is submitted in the Slovak language. Part of the auto-abstract is a list of all published works of the doctoral student that are related to the researched issue and responses to them with precise bibliographic data, a list of used literature and an annotation in one of the following foreign languages: English, French, Spanish, German and Russian.
The self-report, reproduced in the required number of copies, will be distributed according to the instructions of the trade union committee, or of the working group or the SOK faculty/university-wide workplace where the defense will be held, no later than three weeks before the day of the defense to institutions and persons according to the customs of the faculty/university-wide workplace, sending in particular:
- a) opponent of the dissertation,
- b) a member of the trade union commission, or of the working group or SOK for the given field of doctoral study.
With the approval of the chairman of the trade union commission, or the chairman of the working group or SOK, the auto-report can be submitted in electronic form.
Opposing the dissertation:
The procedure and details are determined by Directive no. 110 Study regulations for the 3rd level of higher education studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_110.pdf and Directive no. 215 About final, rigorous and habilitation theses under the conditions of the University of Žilina in Žilina:
https://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/EN/smernica-UNIZA-c-215-en.pdf
Dissertation opponents and their opinions:
Dissertation opponents are appointed by the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector on the proposal of the chairman of the departmental committee, or chairman of the working group or SOK. Opponents are chosen from among experts in the issue being addressed. Each of the opponents must be from a different organization. There can be one opponent from the faculty/university-wide workplace where the doctoral student is studying.
The dissertation is assessed by at least two opponents. At least one opponent must have a scientific-pedagogical title of professor, or he must have a scientific-pedagogical title of docent and hold the position of professor, or he must have the scientific title of Doctor of Sciences, or he must be a researcher with a recognized scientific qualification level I. or IIa. Other opponents must have the scientific and pedagogical title of associate professor or hold the position of associate professor, they can be important experts in the position of visiting professor, employees with an academic PhD degree. (or its older equivalent), significant experts from practice with an academic PhD degree. (or its older equivalent).
The provisions of Art. 13 par. 4 (Directive No. 110). The opponent cannot be a family member of the doctoral student, his direct superior or subordinate in an employment relationship or a similar employment relationship, or a supervisor. In accordance with the established time schedule for the preparation of the defense of the dissertation, the opponent submits his written opinion to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector and returns the dissertation. If the opponent cannot prepare the opinion, he will notify the dean of the faculty/in the case of university-wide study programs the rector within one week of receiving the appointment as an opponent.
If the opponent does not submit his assessment within the set deadline and does not do so even after receiving the reminder, the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will invite him to return the dissertation and appoint a new opponent. The opponent's opinion contains an objective and critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the submitted dissertation, is brief and does not repeat the content.
In the opinion, the opponent mainly expresses:
- To the topicality of the chosen topic.
- To fulfill the set goals of the dissertation.
- To the selected processing methods.
- To the achieved results, indicating what new knowledge the dissertation brings and where it was published.
- To benefit the further development of science, technology or art and for practice.
The final thesis further evaluates:
- Originality of work.
- Fulfillment of set goals.
- Level of analysis and mastery of the current state of knowledge of the given issue.
- The level of the practical/empirical part of the work.
- Solution procedure and methods used.
- Level of interpretation of results, level of drawn conclusions and proposed solutions.
- Practical applicability of results.
- Work structure.
- Used terminology and professional language level.
- Work with literature and bibliographic references.
- Graphic editing of work.
- Level of cooperation with the trainer and activity in the solution.
At the end, it will be clearly stated whether, based on the submitted dissertation, it proposes or does not propose the awarding of the academic title PhD. in the relevant study program in the field of study.
Defense of the dissertation:
Before submitting the application for permission to defend the dissertation, the doctoral student will conduct an internal defense at his workplace. The faculty/university-wide workplace determines the time schedule for the preparation of the dissertation defense from the submission of the application for permission to defend the dissertation to its completion.
The dissertation together with its defense form one subject. The defense of the dissertation is a state exam, and in the standard length of study, the doctoral student must complete it no later than the last month of the last academic year of his standard length of study. The defense of the dissertation in the above-standard length of study must take place no later than two years after the end of the standard length of study. During this period, a doctoral student in the full-time form of doctoral studies is not entitled to a scholarship, he continues to fulfill his duties at his place of work and pays tuition for the extra-standard length of study. The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector ensures that the defense of the dissertation takes place on the set date.
The chairman of the defense commission will send the opponent's opinions to the opponents, members of the commission, including the supervisor, the doctoral student and the department or external educational institution that published the topic. The defense of the dissertation is public, in exceptional cases the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs the rector can declare it non-public; if its public defense would endanger a secret protected by a special law.
The defense of the dissertation takes place in the form of a scientific debate. The doctoral student will present the content of his dissertation, results and benefits. Opponents will present their opinions, on which the doctoral student will take a position. The discussion verifies the correctness, justification and scientific originality of the knowledge contained in the dissertation. The defense can only be held in the presence of at least two thirds of the number of members of the defense committee entitled to vote, including at least two opponents, while at least one member of the committee must be from a workplace outside UNIZA. In the event that the topic was announced by an external educational institution, a committee member from this external educational institution must be present.
If, for serious reasons, the doctoral student is unable to participate in the defense on the appointed date, he/she shall apologize in advance in writing to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector and also to the chairman of the defense committee. The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector, in agreement with the chairman of the defense committee, will in such case determine an alternative date for the defense and notify its participants. At a closed session, the progress and result of the defense and the possibility of using the results of the dissertation in practice will be evaluated. At the same time, the committee and the opponents will decide in a secret vote whether the committee proposes to award the doctoral student an academic title. Subsequently, the committee evaluates the defense of the dissertation with a grade, while the classification is carried out according to the classification scale, which consists of six classification levels:
| Grade |
Word classification and its definition
|
Range of knowledge (%)
|
Numeric value
|
|
A (excellent - excellent results)
|
The dissertation is processed in an above-standard manner in terms of content and formality. The objectives of the work are consistently met and their fulfillment is supported by consistent argumentation. The solution is exceptional, innovative and realistic. Recommendations include innovative and creative ideas in the form of proposals that are suitable for practice
|
93 – 100
|
1 |
|
B (very good - above average results)
|
The dissertation is prepared at a very good level and there are no flaws in it. The objectives of the work are fulfilled. Recommendations are appropriate, identify potential opportunities and risks of implementation in practice.
|
85 – 92 |
1,5 |
|
C (good - average results)
|
The dissertation is processed in a standard way, minor flaws do not affect the results of the work. The objectives of the thesis are met, but a consistent argumentation is lacking. The theoretical analysis of the problem is partially supported by arguments and comparison. Recommendations are appropriate.
|
77 – 84 |
2 |
|
D (satisfactory - acceptable results)
|
The dissertation is completed satisfactorily. It contains significant flaws that do not affect the results of the work. The goals of the work are partially met. Recommendations are appropriate.
|
69 – 76 |
2,5 |
|
E (sufficient - results meet the minimum criteria)
|
The dissertation is processed in a satisfactory manner. Shows understanding of the topic, the assignment is incomplete. The solution is only proposed, but the conditions and benefits of implementation are not determined. There are no supporting arguments for the reality of the stated conclusions.
|
61 – 68 |
3 |
|
FX (insufficient - more work required)
|
The dissertation is processed in an unsatisfactory manner. The objectives of the final work are not met. Conclusions and recommendations are not included in the work. The presented solution is superficial, without real conclusions and implementation conditions. The work shows serious shortcomings and does not meet the requirements set for the final work. The FX grade is also determined if, during the processing of the work, the copyrights of third parties, intellectual property rights were violated, or it was proven that the work is plagiarized based on the Originality Control Protocol.
|
less than 61 |
4 |
In case the committee decides not to award an academic degree, the evaluation of the defense is FX.
The presence of at least two-thirds of the members of the defense committee, including at least two opponents, is required for a valid decision on the outcome of the dissertation defense. In order to successfully complete the defense of the dissertation, the doctoral student must obtain a majority of the positive votes of the present members of the committee for the defense of the dissertation and opponents.
Minutes are written about the defense, which are signed by the chairman of the defense committee, the members of the committee present and the opponents. The chairman of the defense committee will announce the result of the vote with justification to the doctoral student and other participants present at its public meeting. The proposal for awarding or not awarding an academic title to a doctoral student, together with the minutes and the doctoral student's file material, will be submitted by the chairman of the defense committee to the dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector.
The dean/in the case of university-wide study programs, the rector will determine in writing an alternative date for the defense of the dissertation in the same study program to a doctoral student who, based on the result of the dissertation defense or due to his unjustified non-participation in the defense, the defense committee has proposed not to award an academic degree. The defense of the dissertation can be repeated only once, no later than two years after the end of the standard length of study. The public part of the dissertation defense is considered public even if the faculty/university-wide workplace ensures its public direct transmission, or during a crisis situation, it will make its audio recording available to the public for listening in the premises of the faculty/university-wide workplace for three months from the end of the crisis situation. In times of crisis, the defense of the dissertation can be carried out via video conference or other means of information and communication technology without physical presence. |
| Opportunities and procedures for participation in student mobility |
Students of SjF UNIZA can participate in international mobility programs of the European Union such as CEEPUS and Erasmus+, where registration and recognition rules for this education are governed by the rules of the respective programs. The list of participating institutions is regularly updated. The instructions are published on the website of the faculty. As part of scientific work on their own projects, or on projects of a supervisor, they are often sent to partner universities and research institutions not only within Europe, but also elsewhere in the world. They can also use bilateral international mobility projects, e.g. through the Slovak Academic Information Agency (SAAIA) and the National Scholarship Fund (NSF).
Binding contractual partnerships enable the participation of interested parties and their representatives in the design, approval, implementation and evaluation of the study program. Agreements with partners specify the conditions for the participation of the partner's employees in the implementation of the study program and the conditions for the provision of spatial, material and information resources and ensuring the quality of the studies carried out in the partner's premises, including the final theses.
UNIZA has the opportunity to send students abroad for studies or internships within the framework of its partnerships at 56 foreign universities. Even wider possibilities covering practically the entire world exist within other schemes, especially within the Erasmus+ program and activities covered by the Ministry of Education and Culture of the Slovak Republic, implemented through SAIA. They are mainly: the Central European Exchange Program for University Studies (CEEPUS), the National Scholarship Program (NŠP), the Austria-Slovakia Action, the Visegrád Fund, etc. In addition to Erasmus+, the faculty has other contractual cooperation with AGH University of Science and Technology (Kraków, Poland), Technical University of Varna (Bulgaria), International Visegrad Fund.
The processes, procedures and structures of student participation in mobility are defined by Directive no. 219 – Mobility of students and employees of the University of Žilina in Žilina abroad - https://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/EN/smernica-UNIZA-c-219-en.pdf
The possibilities of participating in the student mobilities are published at the UNIZA web site in section possibilities of study: https://www.uniza.sk/index.php/studenti/vseobecne-informacie/erasmus https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php/en/erasmus/application-procedure
and in the section - study abroad: https://www.uniza.sk/index.php/studenti/vseobecne-informacie/studium-v-zahranici at the Faculty web site in the section international cooperation: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php/medzinarodna-spolupraca/podpora/erazmus and on the section general information - study abroad: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php/studenti/vseobecne-informacie/studium-v-zahranici
Basic conditions for the mobility of UNIZA students abroad:
To ensure student mobility, a faculty coordinator is designated as the main coordinator, who is usually a vice dean, whose competence is international cooperation. The task of the coordinators is to organize partner-based mostly international cooperation in educational and scientific research activities, to solve tasks connected with the sending and receiving of students and employees for mobilities, as well as to provide advisory services on study options and mobilities.
Completion of a part of the study at another university abroad is subject to:
- an application for exchange study and confirmation of acceptance by a partner institution (foreign mobility or internship),
- an agreement between individual partner institutions on study (in the case of UNIZA cooperation with another partner institution that has an accredited study program in a given field of study at the partner institution or a similar field of study at a foreign partner institution, and that has a certified/accredited internal system of higher education quality or ESG 2015),
- an agreement between individual partner institutions on a joint study program, which is also jointly accredited as a joint study program in accordance with the internal quality system of higher education at UNIZA.
When studying at another university abroad, according to The details are set out in the decree of the Ministry of Education and Culture of the Slovak Republic on the study credit system. The contract is concluded before the student enters the receiving university.
Procedure for participation in mobilities:
A student who has been approved by the selection committee and submits a document of approval (e.g. contract with the participant, letter on the result of the selection committee, etc.) for a study stay abroad, or the contractual basis for completing a part of your studies at a foreign university within the framework of the European Union, Erasmus+, National Scholarship Program, SAIA, Fulbright Commission, cross-border cooperation, bilateral programs, and others, compiles a study plan from the subjects offered at the foreign university within the scope of the standard load student, i.e. 30 credits even with completed subjects at UNIZA per semester, or 60 credits per academic year, but at least 15 credits per semester. In the event of a difference in the number of credits of equivalent subjects enrolled in the study plan for studying at a university abroad, the number of credits awarded at UNIZA in the relevant study program applies.
The compiled study plan is discussed by the student with the guarantor of the study program. The study plan is finally approved by the vice-dean with competence for international cooperation of the relevant UNIZA faculty.
The study plan is drawn up primarily from the offer of study subjects at a foreign university and contains the equivalents of compulsory and compulsory elective subjects of the study program prescribed by the student in his study program for the relevant academic year at UNIZA. In the event that the foreign university does not offer the equivalents of these compulsory and compulsory optional subjects, the student can also choose the equivalents of compulsory and compulsory optional subjects prescribed in the higher year of the curriculum of his study program. The student completes the study plan from optional and optional subjects offered by the foreign university so that these subjects are related to the focus of the student's study program at UNIZA and that the student receives the appropriate number of credits together with the mandatory and mandatory optional subjects. Compulsory, mandatory optional, optional and optional subjects that he was supposed to take according to his study program at UNIZA, but their equivalents are not offered by the foreign university, he must deregister before leaving for mobility by notifying the relevant teacher or in the study report and after returning from mobility, those whose equivalents he completed abroad will be recognized.
Before being sent on a study stay, in addition to the study/internship agreement ("Learning agreement"), the student also fills out the "Information on the planned study stay", a document which also includes the study plan of the student sent on a study stay abroad in the relevant academic year. In the form, he fills in the names of the subjects he will complete abroad and their equivalents according to his study plan at UNIZA. The compulsory and optional subjects of the study plan that the student cannot take abroad, as the foreign university does not offer them in the given semester, the student will take according to the instructions of the subject guarantor and the prescribed subjects will be listed in the section.
Before traveling abroad, the student is obliged to:
- report your study stay/internship to the head of the department that guarantees the relevant study program, or to the guarantor of the study program,
- inform the relevant teacher, the subject whose equivalent will be studied at a foreign university, or whose subject will not be studied at UNIZA in the given semester due to a study stay/internship. If he does not do so, the teacher will report the absence of the respective student in this subject and the student will have to transfer this subject to the next semester/year of study. This fact is also indicated in the AIS.
In the event that the student will study at a foreign university and the foreign university does not offer in the given semester the equivalents of the subjects of the student's study program included in the relevant semester, it is recommended to draw up a study plan so that the student completes the missing subjects in the given semester, e.g. in the form of an individual study plan, or you enrolled them in the following academic year at UNIZA.
The student is obliged to submit all documents confirming the completion of the study stay/internship abroad to the vice-dean with competence for international cooperation of the relevant UNIZA faculty no later than 30 days (in justified cases, within 45 days) from the day of the end of the study stay/internship abroad, so that the study stay can be concluded, and certificates of completion of the stay and subjects necessary for the completion of the year of the relevant study program could be issued, in particular:
- a certificate or other document from the receiving institution confirming the beginning and end of the study stay/internship,
- list of completed courses and achieved study results (containing at least: course number, course name, course duration, number of course credits awarded and student evaluation for the course)/internship evaluation.
If the structure of the subjects for which the earned credits are recognized does not correspond to the required structure of the subjects in terms of the study program at UNIZA in the relevant year of the student's studies, the student is obliged to write down the missing compulsory and compulsory electives for studying at UNIZA in the following academic year.
In the event that the student does not fulfill the agreed study plan and the obligations stated in the study/internship agreement ("Learning Agreement") and other grant documents due to his own fault, he is obliged to return the grant to the relevant institution.
Subjects completed at the receiving higher education institution are recognized by the guarantor of the study program in cooperation with the vice-dean for education at the faculty or, in the case of completion of subjects abroad, with the vice-dean, who is responsible for international cooperation, to the student on the basis of an application, which includes a statement of study results, which he prepares for the student the receiving university at the end of his studies as well as information sheets or syllabi of completed subjects. The evaluation of the subject on the basis of recognition will be entered in the report for study in AIS. The application and related documentation become part of the student's personal study documentation maintained by the department for education. |
| Rules for adherence to academic ethics and rules for drawing consequences |
The rules for observing academic ethics and drawing consequences are governed by the Disciplinary Regulations for Students of the University of Žilina in Žilina, the Disciplinary Commission of the SjF UNIZA, the Code of Ethics, the UNIZA Ethics Commission, directive no. 226 - On copyright ethics and the elimination of plagiarism in the conditions of the University of Žilina in Žilina and Directive no. 215 - On final, rigorous and habilitation theses under the conditions of the University of Žilina in Žilina:
The Code of Ethics of the University of Žilina in Žilina defines ethical principles in the following areas:
- general ethical principles applicable to all persons employed or studying at the university,
- relationship with the university and the public,
- principles in pedagogical activity,
- principles in scientific research activity,
- principles in UNIZA research practice and unacceptable research practices,
- policies for university students.
Ethical principles in pedagogical activities are defined as follows:
- The pedagogical activity of university teachers and researchers is based on the principles of tolerance, respect for the truth, respect for man and his personality, respect for freedom of thought, expression and objectivity.
- University teachers and researchers respect students' right to free access to education, support their creative work in order to stimulate the development of a complete personality, both from a professional and ethical point of view.
- University teachers and researchers use the opportunity of academic land to freely and objectively transmit their scientific, professional and pedagogical knowledge and knowledge, respecting the right to education and information of university students.
- Relations between members of the academic community are created on the basis of collegiality and mutual negotiations are always correct.
- University teachers and researchers do not abuse their position as superior. They do not ask students for activities that are the subject of their own duties and do not appropriate students' work. If it is justified, they show respect for the results of the students' work by recognizing them as authors or co-authors in the framework of publication activities and publication of research results.
- In their pedagogical activities, university teachers and researchers perform their work duties honestly, responsibly and at a high professional level. They use the working time fund only for activities that correspond to the job description and the employment contract. All non-working activities are carried out only after the working hours have been completed. The employee is obliged to request prior written consent from the rector to perform gainful activity that is consistent with the employer's subject of activity in accordance with the provisions of the Labor Code and the Work Regulations of the University of Žilina in Žilina.
- University teachers and researchers strive for their own professional growth and try to offer the latest knowledge gained in teaching in the best possible and understandable form.
- University teachers and researchers, when evaluating study results as well as the results of scientific work, always evaluate the results of students' or employees' work fairly and transparently, so that unjustified differences do not arise in similar cases. They do not approach any form of influencing student results, thereby supporting anti-corruption behavior in accordance with directive no. 110 Study schedule for the 3rd degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina.
- In accordance with the Code of Ethics, it is not possible to allow UNIZA students to be supervised by a person close to them, which in accordance with the Civil Code, is a direct relative, parent, sibling and a spouse or other persons in a family or similar relationship. The same principle is respected by UNIZA also in the field of evaluation of study results or scientific research work, when these persons should not be a direct part of the habilitation and inauguration proceedings, and they may also not be included in the UNIZA workplace in a direct relationship of superiority and subordination in accordance with Act no. 552/2003 Coll. on the performance of work in the public interest, as amended.
The ethical principles for university students are defined as follows:
- The student respects the name, symbols of UNIZA and its components, academic officials, teaching staff and other employees of the university.
- The student behaves in such a way that there is no disruption of mutual relationships created for the successful completion of studies.
- The student freely expresses his professional opinions, respects freedom of speech and critical thinking, free exchange of opinions and information.
- When solving the problems of the teaching process and the organization of life at UNIZA, he turns with confidence to his teachers, academic officials and members of the academic senate, while respecting their work duties and right to privacy.
- The student is aware of his responsibility for the consequences of his actions during the teaching process, respects the study regulations of the university faculties and uses their provisions in accordance with good manners, is attentive, active during classes and comes to classes and exams prepared. The student does not disrupt the course of classes or exams by arriving late or leaving early, disturbing the teacher and other students with activities that are not related to classes, and uses information and communication tools during classes in accordance with the teacher's guidelines. He does not come to class under the influence of alcohol or other intoxicating substances, does not eat or sleep during class.
- When processing seminar, semester and final theses and publishing the results of scientific work, the student behaves in accordance with Article 6 of this directive as well as in accordance with directive no. 110 Study schedule for the 3rd degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina. During written assignments and exams, he does not reply to classmates and only uses study aids approved by the examiners.
- During classes, the student respects teachers and classmates, behaves correctly, tactfully and tolerantly towards them. When addressing teachers and colleagues, in verbal and e-mail communication, he respects the rules of social behavior. It does not harass, discriminate, insult anyone because of their origin, nationality, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability, or use violence or the threat of violence.
- The student observes the principles of social intercourse in the premises of the university. He comes to class and to the exam in appropriate social clothing in accordance with the recommendations of UNIZA. At sports activities and practical jobs, he respects the requirements of the teachers when dressing.
- The student behaves sparingly towards the property of the university. He uses technical means, computer technology and the Internet only for teaching purposes, he does not abuse them for commercial purposes or for illegal activities. When using them, he complies with safety regulations and principles of health and life protection.
The code of ethics obliges all employees and students of the university to behave in accordance with its requirements. Any violation and subsequent measures are dealt with by the university's Ethics Commission, which is appointed by the rector. (Current composition of the ethics commission: https://www.uniza.sk/index.php/univerzita/vsoebecne-informacie/eticky-kodex)
In connection with the observance of the Code of Ethics, every member of the academic community and employee of the university has the right to submit an initiative to the chairman of the Ethics Commission. Any UNIZA employee, faculty employee, UNIZA student or any other person who has learned about the actions of a UNIZA student or employee that could have signs of a violation of the Code of Ethics can submit a complaint to the Chairman of the Ethics Committee. The initiative is submitted in written form with a handwritten signature or in electronic form with an authorized electronic signature. If the petition filed electronically is not authorized or sent through an access point that requires successful authentication of the person submitting the petition, the person submitting the petition must supplement it in writing with a handwritten signature or an authorized electronic signature within three working days of its submission, otherwise the initiative is postponed. The initiative must contain at least the name and surname of the submitter, the submitter's signature, a brief description of the situation, the provision of the Code of Ethics that was violated or was not applied. If the initiative is delivered anonymously, it will only be registered and will not be discussed further.
The Ethics Commission is obliged to discuss a duly submitted initiative no later than one month from its receipt or forward it to the head of the component in accordance with Art. 6 par. 7 of this directive. In the case of solving a complaint in accordance with this directive, emphasis is placed on the cooperation of all parties involved and the highest possible privacy protection is strictly observed.
In the case of a violation of the Code of Ethics, the opinion of the Ethics Commission will contain a recommendation or a proposal for corrective measures for further action by the bodies responsible for decision-making, which are the rector, dean or other head of the UNIZA component in accordance with the UNIZA Organizational Rules. All participating parties must be notified in writing of the opinion of the Ethics Commission. The employee to whom the opinion of the Ethics Commission is concerned has the right within 7 days from the date of delivery of the opinion of the Ethics Commission to request a correction to the opinion of the Ethics Commission in the form of submitting a request for correction and explanation to the rector, dean or other leading part of UNIZA in accordance with the Organizational Regulations of UNIZA, and the will consider the request when determining corrective measures.
The result of the Ethics Commission's deliberations may also be a recommendation of a procedure in accordance with § 108f et seq. Act No. 131/2002 Coll. on higher education institutions as amended (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on Higher Education Institutions").
If a disciplinary offense is detected, the initiative is forwarded to the Disciplinary Commission of UNIZA or the Disciplinary Commission of the faculty for discussion. The disciplinary procedure is defined by Directive no. 201 – Disciplinary regulations for students of the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/fstroj/pdf/Predpisy/02092021_S-201-2021-Disciplinarny-poriadok-pre-studentov-UNIZA.pdf
The basic rules of author ethics as an unwritten set of moral principles that the author, whether an employee or a UNIZA student, must respect when writing scientific, professional publications and university publications, and UNIZA's position on respecting the legal and moral rights of authors and the principles of correct publication practice are defined in Directive no. . 226 - on copyright ethics and the elimination of plagiarism in the conditions of the University of Žilina in Žilina: https://www.uniza.sk/images/pdf/kvalita/2021/smernica-UNIZA-c-226.pdf
At the same time, the rules of author ethics are closely linked to the framework principles of good conduct in research, the European Code of Ethics and Research Integrity, and support the raising of the scientific and research standards of the UNIZA academic community in line with Directive no. 207- Code of ethics of the University of Žilina in Žilina. For a long time, UNIZA has focused on raising awareness of the importance of observing the rules of authorial ethics among its employees and students, and fundamentally rejects any unauthorized copying of author's texts as well as ideas without reference to their author, thereby trying to eliminate possible plagiarism. It thoroughly approaches the control of the originality of intellectual or industrial property outputs of students as well as employees, and in case of doubt about the authorship of the presented work or infringement of intellectual or industrial property rights, it is fundamentally defined against them, as stated in directive no. 110 Study regulations for the 3rd degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina as well as in article 6 par. 2 and article 11 par. 11 of the UNIZA Code of Ethics.
In order to eliminate plagiarism, UNIZA proceeded to check the originality of not only final, rigorous and habilitation theses in accordance with Article 10 of Directive no. 215 - on final, rigorous and habilitation theses under the conditions of the University of Žilina in Žilina through the Central Register of final theses, but also on checking the originality of all types of scientific and professional outputs (publications) of UNIZA employees and students, semester theses of UNIZA students or works of a similar nature.
Proven non-compliance with author's ethics and behavior in accordance with Art. 3 of this directive is considered a violation of the employee's work duties by UNIZA employees, and in the case of a violation by a student, the stated facts qualify as a violation of directive no. 110 Study regulations for the third degree of university studies at the University of Žilina in Žilina, possibly a violation of Directive no. 201 Disciplinary order. In the event of a violation of the Disciplinary Rules of the University of Žilina in Žilina, the initiative will be forwarded for discussion to the Disciplinary Commission of UNIZA or the Disciplinary Commission of the faculty. |
| Procedures applicable to students with special needs |
The procedures applicable for the students with special needs are described at UNIZA web site - https://www.uniza.sk/index.php/en/study/general-information/applicants-with-special-needs
The Centre of Support for Students with Special Needs is working at UNIZA. The centre provides information, consultancy, supporting services and educational activities for applicants and students with special needs, teachers and general public. At the Faculty there is a coordinator for supporting the students with specific needs who assesses the possibilities/restrictions and the risk rate of studying the given study programme for the students with specific needs. He/she suggests adequate adaptations and supporting services determined for a student with specific needs and realises the consultancy and mediatory activity. He/she participates in creating a system of hybrid education and support for the students with special needs.
The conditions for the applicants for study with special needs during the admission procedure and during the study at UNIZA are described by the Directive No. 198 - Support of Applicant for Study and Students with Specific Needs at UNIZA: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/images/pdf/smernice/S_198.pdf
UNIZA also provides services of the Centre for psychological support: https://www.uniza.sk/index.php/en/study/practical-informations/centre-for-psychological-support
The workplace was established by joining the consultancy services in the Centre of the Psychological Support, Social Consultancy and the newly created career consultancy. The advisory centre with complex services will ensure that the students will have a simple access to the consultancy and other services corresponding with their needs. Its mission is to help the students cope with their study, prepare their entrance to the labour market, support their relationship with the university and create links between the university ground and employers.
The CCC UNIZA provides a complex advisory service to the students and employees of the university (further only “clients”). The main objective of the CCC UNIZA is to provide the psychological, career, social consultancy and intervention oriented on the development of the clients´ personality and support for solving the problems of the intrapersonal character (the problems connected with the university study, the area of the social problems, the orientation in the area of personal and career targets) and the interpersonal character (the adaptation to the study and working group and also the group of people of the same age, starting and maintaining full-fledged personal and working relations). The task of the CCC UNIZA is a) to provide the clients with the possibility of individual consultations in the framework of solving their difficulties and problems and developing the personality potential; b) to provide the clients with the possibility of the group sessions of the educational and advisory character; c) to help utilise the knowledge from the area of psychology, career advisory, pedagogical and social work for self-education and self-control; d) to support the development or recovery of the psychical health, to orient on other healthcare institutions to ensure the adequate professional aid and therapy; e) to participate in implementing the inclusive approach to education with the goal to ensure the equality of opportunities, respect to individual educational needs and the active involvement to the educational process of each student. |
| Procedures for filing complaints and appeals by students |
The student freely expresses his/her professional opinions, respects freedom of speech and critical thinking, free exchange of opinions and information. He/she turns with confidence to his/her teachers, academic officials and the members of the Academic Senate in the case of solving the problems concerning the teaching process and organisation of their life at UNIZA.
At the Faculty the students can (except for the aforementioned possibilities) address their initiations to the study advisor (the study advisors are appointed by the Dean at the beginning of the school year), they can turn to the representatives of the students´ support (a group created for the purposes of communication and advisory activities), the Head of Department, the SP guarantor or the Chairman of the Trade Union Council or directly to the Dean.
In dependence on the essence of such an initiation it is solved by a person responsible for the given area (the Dean, Vice-Deans, guarantors, Heads of Department) or an established commission (disciplinary, ethical).
At the university level the processes, procedures and structures are defined by the Directive No. 110 - STUDY ORDER FOR THE THIRD DEGREE OF THE UNIVERSITY STUDY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF ŽILINA.
At the same time all student of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering have the possibility to ask the Dean freely and anonymously at the platform - Questions for the Dean of the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering: https://www.fstroj.uniza.sk/index.php?option=com_sppagebuilder&view=page&id=272 |
