One of the most important milestones in your doctoral journey is the first-year progress review. For many students, especially in their first year, this also functions as the confirmation of registration, a formal stage that determines whether you can continue at PhD level.
Whether your institution combines these processes or keeps them separate, the annual review is your opportunity to reflect on progress, receive constructive feedback, and plan the next stage of your research.
Understanding the PhD Confirmation of Registration and Annual Review
First-Year Progress Review / Confirmation of Registration
The confirmation of registration is a formal assessment that usually takes place at the end of your first year (full-time) or second year (part-time). Its purpose is to confirm your readiness to continue as a PhD candidate and to ensure your research project is viable for successful completion.
Unlike routine monitoring, this is a high-stakes stage. Possible outcomes include:
- Approval to continue as a PhD candidate
- A request to resubmit your report or presentation
- Downgrading to an MPhil
- In rare cases, withdrawal if the required standard is not met
This process can involve submitting a substantial piece of written work (such as your first chapter, literature review, or even a conference paper), delivering a presentation, and attending an interview or viva-style discussion with an assessment panel.
Annual Review
The annual review is a formal progress check that all doctoral students undertake each year, regardless of their stage in the programme. Its main aims are to:
- Monitor your research progress
- Agree on goals for the following year
- Identify any challenges or support needs
- Keep your project on track for timely completion
Annual reviews continue throughout your PhD and are designed as constructive checkpoints rather than pass-or-fail assessments.
Your first annual review may also serve as your confirmation of registration, meaning a single assessment fulfils both purposes. Whereas some institutions run the two processes independently, with confirmation sitting alongside — but separate from — annual progress monitoring.
Additional Reporting for Funded Students
If you are funded through a Doctoral Training Partnership (DTP) or Doctoral Development Programme (DDP), you may have extra requirements beyond the annual review. These often include:
- Submitting Training Needs Analysis (TNA) forms
- Providing additional progress updates twice a year
These ensure your training and research are meeting both academic and funding body expectations.
What to Expect During Your First-Year Progress Review
A typical PhD confirmation of registration involves:
- Written Submission
Often called a progress review report or confirmation report, this document summarises your research activity, findings, and future plans. Some universities also ask for a substantial writing sample, such as a chapter draft, literature review, or conference paper. - Presentation
Usually 10–20 minutes, this is your chance to communicate progress and future plans to the panel. - Panel Discussion
Academics ask questions to explore your understanding, critical thinking, and readiness for continued research.
What Your Supervisor(s) and Independent Assessor(s) Look For
While each university may have slightly different criteria, most panels focus on:
- Clarity and focus of research questions
The panel wants to see that your project is coherent, well-defined, and academically significant. Evolving questions are natural, but your ability to articulate them clearly is key. - Understanding of theory and methodology
You should demonstrate that you can justify your theoretical framework and methodological choices. If you’ve made changes since starting, explain why. - Progress relative to expectations
Panels expect evidence of research activity, including data collection, literature review, or preliminary analyses. They want to know you’re moving steadily toward your PhD goals. - Critical engagement and independence
A PhD is about independent research. Your panel will assess how critically you engage with existing literature, theories, and your own findings. - Future planning
The review is forward-looking. You should show awareness of what remains to be done, potential risks, and strategies for overcoming challenges.
How to Write a Progress Review Report for PhD
Your written report is central to the confirmation of registration process. Here’s a step-by-step guide:
Step 1: Understand the Required Format
- University-provided forms: Some institutions provide structured forms with prompts.
- Freeform narrative: Others require a longer, essay-style report.
- Additional material: Some require a writing sample, e.g., a chapter or conference paper.
Step 2: Cover Essential Content
A complete progress review report should include:
- Summary of Work Completed
Highlight tasks completed, such as literature reviews, or draft chapters. - Plan for the Following Year
Set measurable goals, including research outputs, publications, or performances, and provide a timeline with milestones. - Training and Development
List completed and planned subject-specific and generic research training. Funded students should link this to their Training Needs Analysis. - Academic Contributions and Engagement
Note teaching, conference presentations, or public engagement activities.
PhD Progress Review Report Sample
While exact formats vary, here’s a simplified outline of a PhD progress review report sample:
Title: Annual Progress Review – Year 1
Candidate Name: Jane Smith
Supervisors: Dr A. Brown, Prof C. Jones
Date: June 2025
Summary of Work Completed: Completed full literature review and drafted Chapter 1; presented paper at XYZ Conference.
Plan for the Following Year: Complete transcription and coding of interviews; draft Chapters 2–3; submit article to Journal of X; attend training on advanced NVivo techniques.
Skills and Training: Completed course on mixed-methods research; attended two writing retreats.
University Engagement: Guest lecture for undergraduate module; assisted in organising departmental seminar series.
How to Prepare for Your First-Year PhD Progress Review
Preparing for your first progress review means organising both your written report and any accompanying presentation so they clearly convey your progress, purpose, and potential.
Clarify Your Research Focus
Before anything else, revisit your research questions. Are they still the same as when you began, or have they evolved? Make sure they are explicit in your review materials — if they aren’t clear to you, they won’t be clear to your panel. Summarise the intellectual contribution you aim to make and explain how your theoretical framework supports this. If you are using more than one framework, ensure the connections are logical and justifiable.
Plan Your Written Submission Carefully
Your written report should provide a coherent narrative of your research progress, highlighting key achievements, methodology, and preliminary findings. Be concise but thorough, demonstrating critical engagement with your literature and theoretical approach. Include any limitations or challenges you have encountered and how you have addressed them, showing reflection and problem-solving.
Some universities may also request a substantial writing sample, such as a first chapter, literature review, or conference paper. Check your institution’s requirements early and discuss with your supervisor so you can allocate sufficient time to prepare all required materials.
Prepare Your Presentation Strategically
In many cases, progress reviews include an oral presentation. Approach this as an opportunity to communicate your work clearly and as practice for your final viva exam.
-
Use slides sparingly; avoid text-heavy designs and instead highlight key points, graphs, or images.
-
Lead with the “headlines”: what you’ve achieved, why it matters, and what comes next.
-
Practise explaining your theoretical choices concisely and confidently.
-
Treat your slides as prompts, not scripts; your spoken delivery should carry the main narrative.
Anticipate Panel Feedback and Questions
Your panel is there to challenge your thinking, not to trip you up. Consider potential weaknesses in your project and address them proactively. You might reflect on limitations, areas that need refining, or skills you intend to develop further. Demonstrating awareness of these areas shows maturity and critical engagement with your work.
Adopt a “Good Enough” Mindset
Your first progress review is not a test of perfection — it is a checkpoint. The literature review will never be fully “finished” at this stage, and your argument may still be evolving. Focus on demonstrating progress, clarity, and critical engagement rather than complete mastery. Flexibility in your thinking is a strength, not a weakness.
Seek Feedback Early
Discuss your report and presentation with your supervisor well before submission. Early feedback allows you to identify gaps, refine your argument, and ensure your review reflects both your current work and your longer-term research direction.
Common PhD Annual Review Questions
Panels often ask questions designed to explore your depth of understanding, problem-solving skills, and research direction. Examples include:
- How has your research question developed since your proposal?
- What are your most significant findings so far?
- What difficulties have you encountered? Did you resolve them? And if so, how?
- How does your work fit into — or challenge — existing literature?
- What risks could threaten your timeline, and how will you mitigate them?
- Why is your project viable and worth pursuing at doctoral level?
- How will you ensure the feasibility of your proposed methods?
- What original contribution do you expect to make?
Final Thoughts
The annual review is a structured chance to reflect, refine, and get feedback that will strengthen your project. If it’s also your confirmation of registration, treat it as a critical gateway to the next stage of your PhD. By preparing your written report thoroughly, practising your presentation, and anticipating likely panel questions, you can turn the process into a positive, confidence-building experience.
👉 Need expert help with your annual review or confirmation of registration?
Choose our tutoring service and collaborate with a dedicated academic in your field. They will help you draft a strong progress report, prepare a persuasive presentation, and rehearse answering panel questions. We’ll work with you to showcase your achievements, plan your next steps, and approach your review with confidence.
Learn more about our tutoring service
FAQs About PhD Annual Progress Review
What is the annual progress review for PhD?
A formal yearly evaluation of your research progress, typically including a written report, presentation, and panel meeting.
What is the first year review for PhD?
Often called the confirmation of registration, the first-year review is a crucial milestone in your PhD journey. It assesses whether your research proposal, methodology, and early work are viable and sufficient for continuation. This review is generally more high-stakes than later annual reviews, as it formally decides if you can continue as a PhD candidate.
Do I have to pass the annual review?
Yes. Passing the annual review is generally required to continue your PhD. For most students, the typical outcome is confirmation that they are progressing satisfactorily, allowing them to continue as PhD candidates. If progress does not meet expectations, the panel may recommend a downgrade to an MPhil or set specific conditions to be fulfilled. The review is intended not as a punitive measure but as a structured way to provide feedback, guidance, and support to ensure you stay on track.
What happens if the panel isn’t satisfied with my progress?
You may be given a specific set of goals to achieve by a follow-up review, or in serious cases, referred to formal academic engagement procedures.
What’s the difference between a viva and an annual review?
A viva, or viva voce, is the final oral examination of your completed thesis and is designed to test your knowledge, analysis, and defence of your research. The annual review, by contrast, is an interim checkpoint to evaluate your progress, provide feedback, and ensure you are on track to complete your PhD successfully.
What is expected from first-year PhD students?
First-year PhD students are expected to lay the foundations for their research. This includes developing a clear research proposal or refining initial ideas, conducting preliminary literature reviews, and identifying key sources relevant to their topic. They should begin any necessary data collection or pilot studies and meet regularly with their supervisors to discuss progress and incorporate feedback into their work.
