Academic Progression and Procedures

Qualifying Exam

In order to be eligible to take the Qualifying Exam students must pass all their core curriculum with a grade of B or higher. Students must take their exam by the end of their second year.

Students prepare a dissertation proposal, which is presented at an oral examination. Its purpose is to determine whether or not the candidate is properly prepared to carry out independent research leading to the completion of a doctoral dissertation. It is not to be regarded merely as a test of the student’s knowledge of a particular field of interest, though such knowledge must be demonstrated. The student must also demonstrate that he or she:

Understands how to pose a scientific question
Is able to develop a systematic approach to its solution
Can interpret the results of that approach concisely and rigorously
Is able to frame that interpretation both within the context of the system in question and of other related biological systems

Passing the examination leads to the advancement to candidacy for Ph.D.

Committee Constitution, Exam Format and Evaluation Criteria

Constitution of Qualifying Examination Committee

The qualifying exam committee consists of a chair and three other Academic Senate faculty members. A student may petition to include one non-Academic Senate faculty person as a member of the committee. The chair of the committee must be a member of the BP Graduate Group, and at least one member of the committee must be from outside the BP program. Choice of committee members is the responsibility of the student in consultation with his or her research and/or academic advisors. Neither the research advisor nor other faculty members who have significantly contributed to the supervision of the proposed research may be members of the oral qualifying exam committee.

Written Proposal - Preparation

Preparation for the examination should allow sufficient time for the candidate’s research proposal to be reviewed by the research advisor, the committee chair, and each committee member. While the format of the written proposal is not specified, a useful outline is that followed in grants or papers:

Introduction to the problem with discussion of prior work in the field

Specific aims or research goals

Methods of reaching the goals

Possible conclusions or future work

Reading

Much of the reading in support of the research proposal is done concurrently with the writing and review process. Exploring related areas and review of basic material from courses, textbooks, etc. should be scheduled as well. It should not be the candidate’s intention to “learn everything.” Rather, preparation should be aimed at gathering the material and concepts needed for a serious technical discussion of the merits of the proposal, the anticipated problems to be solved, and the overall importance of the project. A firm understanding of basic concepts is often as important as the details of the research proposal.

Preliminary Data

A question often raised is how much preliminary data a candidate must generate before taking the oral examination. The ideal is to have sufficient results to form a springboard for discussion. An assessment of the readiness of each student should be a matter for discussion among the student, the research advisor, and the chair of the committee, with input from other committee members when appropriate. However, both the candidate and committee members should remember that this is a qualifying examination, not a report on a substantially completed thesis project.

Practice Orals

Most candidates find it helpful to have practice oral exams, calling on students, postdoctoral fellows, and faculty members who are not members of the examination committee. Proposals and presentations are frequently modified based on the practice orals.

Oral Exam Protocol

Once the research advisor has determined that all appropriate program requirements have been fulfilled and that the student is ready to take the exam, the student finalizes selection of the qualifying exam committee and sets a date for the exam. The program administrator should be notified of the committee composition and fields for examination six weeks before the date of the exam to submit the appropriate forms to the Graduate Division.

Time line

2-6 months before oral exam:

Consult with research advisor and potential committee members

Select fields for examination

Set date and time for exam, reserve room, notify committee members

Begin preparation of written proposal

Begin practice exams

6 weeks before:

Provide program administrator with necessary information (committee members, fields for examination, date of exam).

If needed, provide petition and CV for non-Academic Senate member to the Graduate Division (petition form available at the Graduate Division Office, MU 200 West or from BMI Program Office).

General Format of Exam

The oral exam takes place with only the orals committee present and must not include the research advisor. Traditionally, the oral exam consists of two parts. In part one, the student is allowed approximately 20 - 30 minutes to present the research proposal, during which time the student may be interrupted with questions. The committee then continues to ask the student questions that are relevant to the proposal, which may include knowledge that would be necessary for the student to address the stated problem. After this questioning is over, approximately 1½ hours including the project presentation time, the student is asked to leave the room so the committee can discusses the student’s performance and take one of the following actions:

Pass the student without further questioning

Fail the student without further questioning

Ask the student to return for further questioning

The third option is the most common. During this second phase of the exam, the committee members ask questions pertaining to subjects relevant to the student’s area of interest or questions related to material covered in the iPQB required courses. This portion of the exam should not exceed 1 to 1½ hours. The student is again asked to leave and the committee votes on the outcome. Potential outcomes are discussed below. It is the responsibility of the chair of the committee to file the appropriate form indicating the outcome with the Graduate Division.

Outcomes of the Examination

Full Pass:
A student who passes the examination is eligible for advancement to candidacy.
Conditional Pass:
A student who passes the examination but demonstrates weaknesses in specific fields may be asked to prepare further oral or written materials and/or take an additional course. The committee chair will send a letter stating the requirements to be met and a deadline date, with copies to the program director and the student’s research advisor. Upon timely completion of these tasks, the student will be eligible to advance to candidacy.
Fail:
A student who fails the examination may have an opportunity to retake it within six months. The committee chair will send notification in writing of subjects for re-examination and a suggested date for the second exam. A copy of the letter to the student should be sent to the program director, program coordinator, and the student’s research advisor. The committee chair and the research advisor will assist in planning for the second examination. Graduate Division policy is that the committee cannot be reconstituted for the second examination.

Faculty / Student Advice

Relevance of the Oral Examination Format

Faculty recognizes that the oral format and the broad range of the examination make it challenging and stressful. These aspects are found in many forums in professional research; presentations of seminars, review papers, site visits, expert testimony, and classroom teaching all draw upon the same critical skills. Good preparation is essential and the experience of both the research advisor and the committee chair can be drawn upon in developing the proposal, and in studying for the exam. Each of the activities required for the oral exam is important in learning to carry out independent research in academic or non-academic settings.
Developing a research plan or proposal is critical to productive work at all levels of research.
The ability to present these ideas to others knowledgeable in one’s field is essential in both oral and written undertakings.
Responding to questions and demonstrating relationships among different areas of knowledge are vital components of teaching and discovery.
Because a Ph.D. is a general degree in the conduct of research rather than mastery of specific technical knowledge, the candidate should look upon completion of the oral qualifying exam as an important and relevant task in obtaining a doctoral degree.

Students’ Perspectives

The best way to choose committee members is to make appointments to speak to the various faculty members whom you think would be interested and knowledgeable in your area of study. If you like the feedback you receive, try to find dates and times that that person is available to sit on your committee. Keep in mind that the chair of your committee should be someone who understands your research well, as this is the person who most influences the committee on whether or not you pass your oral exams.
One of the early steps in preparing to take your orals is to write a proposal stating the purpose and goals for your research project, the preliminary data that you have, and what you plan to do in the future. It is recommended that the proposal be thorough but concise. The written proposal should be distributed to your committee members for feedback at least a few weeks before your exam date. It is appropriate to ask your committee members what type of questions they might ask, based on the written proposal that you have given them to read. The questions you are asked during the exam depend highly on who is on your committee and the content of your research proposal.
It may also be helpful to discuss, with your committee chair, the format your exam will follow. Many students prepare to present a ten- minute oral summary of their research proposal as the first part of their oral exam. It is important in this presentation to stress the significance and scope of the research that you are proposing to perform for your thesis project. Practice orals are one of the most important things you need to do in preparing for your exam. It is the best way to identify your strengths and weaknesses in everything from your general knowledge to your presentation skills. You may also wish to practice with different groups of people (preferably with those who have already been through their oral exam) in order to cover a wide range of possible questions.
The strategy for studying depends mainly on the specific project being proposed. One should ask both the research advisor and the committee chair for guidance. A useful strategy is to study general principles before becoming immersed in the specific. Many students schedule practice sessions before taking the real exam.

A Faculty Member’s Perspective

In choosing an orals committee, it is important to select a group of professors that will be able to understand your research topic and offer constructive and insightful criticism. However, it should also be a group that you feel comfortable with - in both a personal and a scientific sense. You should also get a clear indication from your chair about what he or she wants to see in your written proposal. Some faculty prefer short proposals (2-3 pages), others prefer more details and experimental results (5-7 pages). It is up to the student to make sure an acceptable proposal is provide to the committee as there are no formal guidelines.
The weeks of preparation leading up to the actual day of the oral exam are undoubtedly a stressful time. Nonetheless, the faculty always begins with the assumption that the student is going to pass, and it is the duty of the committee, to decide whether or not the student prepared properly, understands the thesis topic, can discuss general scientific issues in a thoughtful and intelligent manner, and are ready to advance to candidacy. In the unlikely chance that things begin going awry, the committee and particularly the chair will likely redirect the questioning to more comfortable territory so as to better engage and relax the student. The committee does not expect the student to know everything and there will be questions that the student may not be able to answer.