Revise ISP - annual follow-up (ISP-system)

Eleven months after the study plan has been established, the supervisor and doctoral student will receive a reminder that it is time for an annual revision of the study plan.

How to make a revision

1. The supervisor creates a new version of the study plan by clicking on "study plans" in the menu bar, search for the doctoral student in the list, click on "revise". The previously established study plan is archived automatically in the system.

2. Update the study plan together (see further down for examples on what should be revised. For more detailed instructions see the user guides at the bottom of the page or information on the staff portal outcomes for doctoral education)

The following can only be completed/revises by the main supervisor:

  • Research school (if applicable)
  • Planned funding
  • Available fixed resources
  • Details about principal and co-supervisors
  • Division of supervisory duties
  • Obligatory courses

3. Document the follow-up meeting in section 7.1 in the study plan.

4. The following documents should be uploaded if applicable:

  • Half-time summary
  • Copy of the half-time review protocol
  • Copy of decision in case of change of supervisor, topic or department
  • New or updated ethical approvals, financial plans etc.
  • Published manuscripts

The files should be named as followed: file name, doctoral student’s initials, date and ISP version. For example: Researchplan_MS_190101_ISP2

5. The study plan must be sent for approval at the latest 13 months after the last approval, or an automatic message will be sent to the director of doctoral education with the information that the annual follow-up has not been completed.


Examples on revisions made at annual follow-up

This text is intended to be a support for doctoral students and supervisors at the annual follow-up of the individual study plan. If you are used to working with paper form 4 for annual follow-up you can download a version containing references to where the corresponding data should be entered into the system. The system is designed so that both the progression of the student as well as any changes or additions should be documented at the annual follow-up.

Information retrieved from Ladok is updated when a new version of the study plan is created, when an existing study plan is opened for revision or by clicking the ‘Update data from Ladok’ button.

Revision of the Degree outcomes and research

Degree outcomes (tab 10)

When revising the degree outcomes, note when activities were completed and, if necessary, update how the learning outcomes are planned to be achieved. Are some of the outcomes already reached or is there a need to revise the activities to fulfil the outcomes? Are there learning outcomes that are not yet achieved that the student should focus on?

Examples on how the outcomes can be achieved are found here.

Research project (tab 6)

Describe the progress for the subprojects, if manuscripts are accepted or published etc. Also indicate deviations since last follow-up in field 6.7 in the study plan.

Are the research questions and hypotheses still valid? What data collections have been performed/experiments conducted so far? Does the data collections/experiments follow the plan reasonably well? Or have major surprises appeared, and if so, how have they been handled? How much work remains? Is the time spent on data collection/experiments reasonable and corresponding to the time table? If not – why? Do the preliminary results correspond to the expected results? Do you, the doctoral student, need more help, and if so what kind of help do you need and by whom?

Is there a plan for which papers each subproject will lead to? Who will be co-authors? How will/do co-authors take part in the writing process? Does this work well? Can something be improved?

Revision of the remaining information in the study plan

Basic information (tab1)

Is the information correct? Some of the entries marked with an asterisk are retrieved from Ladok and if incorrect need to be updated in Ladok.

Have you registered your interest in one or several doctoral programme(s)?

General Information (tab2)

Is the given term for planned defence still valid or have you had any special ground for leave/appointment eligible for extension of employment as a doctoral student? See the Rules for doctoral education on Study funding.

Rate of study and student finance (tab3)

Are the time plan and the financial plan correct? Is there a mismatch between planned and previous funding? Information on previous funding is retrieved from Ladok, and errors need to be corrected in Ladok. Revisions of the financial plan is done by the principal supervisor. The principal supervisor is also responsible for informing the head of department and director of doctoral education at the department if there are essential changes in funding. Revised financial plan should be attached to the study plan.

Have departmental and/or clinical duties taken place as planned?

Have possible leave/appointment eligible for extension been indicated? See the Rules for doctoral education on Study funding.

Courses, conferences and other educational elements (tab 4)

Have you completed any of the planned courses? Are there new courses that should be added? Have you covered all the compulsory courses according to the general study plan? When a planned course is attended and approved in Ladok it can be removed from planned courses.

Make sure that approved and credited courses are correct. If not, check the information in Ladok. Regarding errors for an approved course contact the course administrator, and regarding errors for credited courses contact the department administrator.

Does the information about conferences and international participation need to be revised? Does the date for half-time review change or be added?

Supervision and examination (tab 5)

Has the planned commitments changed for any of the supervisors?

If it is the first annual follow-up after admission, have you chosen a mentor? Has a new mentor been appointed? More information regarding mentor is found at the staff portal.

Is the allocation of supervisory contributions correct?

How often do you meet for planned/prepared/formal discussion about the research project? Is this interval as you prefer? What about the communication between supervisors, is the responsibility and their commitments clear for everyone? Is there a need for an additional supervisor?

Follow up meetings (tab 7)

Annual follow-up meetings should take place at least once a year. Briefly describe the content of the meeting and participants.

Comments (tab 8)

Doctoral students and supervisors can add comments about previous/future achievements, or about any discrepancies between student and supervisor that needs to be highlighted.

The upper field can only be edited by the doctoral student, and the lower field only by the principal supervisor. Note that the comments will be saved and included in the study plan.

Ethical approvals (tab 9)

Are there new ethical approvals that need to be added?


See user guides below for more detailed instructions.