Admission
Admission is normally based on the evaluation of qualifications and an interview.
During its first meeting, the Selection Committee establishes the criteria for evaluating candidates' qualifications. These criteria are published immediately following the meeting. As the PhD is a third-cycle higher education programme, the Committee generally considers academic and research qualifications rather than professional work experience.
In the interview evaluation, the Committee assesses the candidate’s expertise in their specific field of study, their broader understanding of cultural heritage (including the evolution of the concept of material and immaterial/intangible cultural heritage, key regulatory frameworks and standards, major institutions, etc.), and their capacity for an interdisciplinary approach.
When assessing research proposals, the PhD board considers their alignment with the programme's core objectives (as outlined on the introductory page), the scientific quality of the project in relation to the current state of the art, the clarity of the objectives, and overall feasibility. For projects involving documents or materials held in archives or museums, candidates are advised to attach documentation confirming guaranteed access.
The Selection Committee reserves the right to make variations to these general guidelines.
Letters of recommendation are not required.
Guidelines for Drafting the PhD Research Proposal
While there is no fixed template for research proposals for the PhD programme in “Sciences for Cultural Heritage and Production”, applicants are strongly advised to include the following sections:
a) Abstract: A concise summary of the entire project (state of the art, objectives, methodology), distinct from any introductory background.
b) State of the Art: A review highlighting recent developments, emerging research trends, and key literature in the field. Crucially, this section should identify gaps or novel areas requiring further investigation to ensure an original scientific contribution to one or more research fields.
c) Project Description: A clear explanation of the proposed objectives and the methodological approach to be adopted.
d) Work Plan & Timeline (Cronoprogramma): A detailed timeline demonstrating the project's feasibility, which forms an integral part of the evaluation. For instance, cataloguing an entire archaeological repository or archive within the three-year timeframe is unfeasible. Similarly, proposing to study an archive that is closed for restoration or privately owned may compromise feasibility. In such cases, letters from the public or private institutions granting explicit access should be attached.
e) Essential Bibliography: A list of key references cited in the state of the art section.
Formatting Note: Research proposals must not exceed 30,000 characters (including spaces and bibliography).
Please note: Proposals must aim to advance scientific knowledge in one or more academic fields, rather than being purely applied or technical projects.