Qualifying Examinations

PROGRAM >> PHD Qualifying Examinations

PHD Qualifying Examinations

The PhD Qualifying Examinations are comprised of two parts: literature-based general qualifier and thesis proposal. Both parts must be successfully completed in order to continue in the doctoral program.

Literature-Based General Qualifying Examination

Purpose

The ability to understand and put into context research literature is key to a successful PhD and research career.

Students will demonstrate their ability to effectively use recently learned course material to develop and showcase an in-depth understanding of the contents of a specific research article. The article will address topics that are directly related to the course for which the literature qualifier section is taken.

Students must successfully complete four sections (out of five) of the literature qualifier exams each on a distinct topic with completion of all sections by the end of year 2. Note that for students in the PhD 4-year track, one out of the five sections may be deferred with a deadline of January 31st of year 2. Please see Retakes (below) about the four out five sections.

As a general rule, at least three of the literature qualifiers that are successfully completed must be associated with AST graduate elective courses (0.5 FCE) or JAS1101. Currently, only PHY1483 Relativity Theory I is accepted as a non-AST/non-JAS1101 course.

If three or more students are taking another course outside of the department (that is approved for graduate elective credit), we will consider offering a lit qual for it following the term in which it is taught as long as it is well aligned with the objectives of the literature qualifier.

The topics will be selected by the student as tied to the elective graduate course material.  Enrollment in the corresponding course is not, however, a requirement for eligibility to select an exam topic.

Format

The literature qualifer is an oral examination. Each exam will typically last 30-45 minutes, and no more than 1 hour.

The student presentation will start with a brief summary description of what the article is about and what are, in the student’s opinion, the key results worth highlighting. This should not take more than 3-5 minutes (uninterrupted).

Examiners will take turn in asking questions. One or (a max of two) follow-up questions are permitted. The exam chair is tasked with making sure that the nature of questioning remains within the bounds of the general guidelines described in this document. In particular, expert questions that could prove challenging to a general professional astronomer are beyond the scope of this examination.

The students can then start elaborating on their summary, discussing for example the methodology adopted, assumptions made, some essential figures and key results. As this proceeds, the exam committee members will pose questions to evaluate the depth of understanding of the student. It should be expected that the vast majority of the examination time will be devoted to questions (and follow-up), rather than a more linear presentation by the student.

During the examination, the student is welcome to use a board as needed, but there will be no slide presentation. Instead, the discussion format would typically correspond to that realized more informally in a journal club.

Rubric and Evaluation

For each question (including the follow-ups) asked during the examination, each examiner will evaluate the student’s response on the following scale:

• 0 — Question was not answered, or misunderstood even after attempt at clarifying with a follow-up question.
• 1 — Answer was not satisfactory (lacking in depth, superficial, etc.).
• 2 — Answer was satisfactory (acceptable level of understanding).
• 3 — Answer demonstrated an in-depth understanding of the concept being evaluated.

Immediately after each exam, examiners will consider the exam and arrive together at a consensus score. A mean score of 1.5 or higher (mean between the average of their original scores and the consensus score) is considered passing.

The exam chair is tasked with making sure that the evaluation proceeds according to these guidelines and with communicating the final grade to the associate chair, graduate and graduate adminstrator. A brief outline of issues that may have occurred during the examination, if any, is also expected to be sent.

The student may pass, pass conditionally, or fail the exam. Conditional passes are considered an option if it is felt by the committee that a deficiency exposed in the exam is not widespread, and that it can be rectified by satisfactory performance in one or two more courses or by other remedial activity (defined by the examination committee). The schedule for completion of the conditions is similarly at the discretion of the committee but must be clearly defined.

Retakes

A student, who fails a specific literature qualifier section, will be allowed to retake it once, on a different article than the one selected for the first examination.  If the retake results in a fail, the student will add a fifth section to complete four out five literature qualifiying exams. There is no need to take a fifth section if four have already been successfully completed. All retakes must be completed by January 31st of the third year.

Schedule

AST1410/1420/1430/1440/JAS1101 will be offered every qual session (so twice per year), regardless of whether the course has been taught or not to allow pacing of the literature qualifiers.

Any other 0.5 FCE astro graduate elective course will be offered in the qualifier session corresponding to the term in which it is taught.

The PHY1483 Relativity Theory I qualifier may be taken in either qualifier session.

Qualifying exam committee members make their availability known 1-2 months ahead of the examination period. The exam period can typically stretch over several weeks. For fall session this may include December and early January. Students sign up for their preferred dates and times for the qualifier section of their choice, on a first come, first serve basis. The detailed schedule that emerges from this process is overseen by the graduate administrator.

Each examination will be scheduled by and run by a committee chair, to be selected in advance of the examination itself.

Each student will identify one research article that they will study, review and present during their examination. The article of choice will be chosen from a curated list of course-related articles (i.e., with direct relevance to the course material recently learned). The student will announce their choice to their exam chair at least 5 business days prior to the examination date.

Thesis Proposal Examination

Purpose

The purpose of the Thesis Proposal Examination is to evaluate the feasibility and value of the proposed thesis, and verify that the student has sufficient preparation in the proposed thesis area to engage in guided independent research.The student is required to provide background material to the examiners, a 10-20 page summary of the proposed thesis, including scientific motivation, techniques, feasibility, and a proposed schedule, a minimum of 5 business days in advance of the examination.

Format

The Thesis Proposal Examination is an oral examination. It begins with a 20-25 minute presentation outlining the proposed thesis, including scientific motivation, techniques, feasibility, and a proposed schedule. The presentation is followed by at least one and typically two rounds of questioning by the examination committee. Unlike the literature qualifying exam, where rigid timekeeping is enforced, the times for questions in the Thesis Examination are general guidelines. Each questioner will typically ask questions for approximately 10 minutes in each round. Occasional follow-up questions that occur out of sequence from other examiners are permitted. There will be a 5 minute break partway through if needed. The exam is generally expected to be be complete at the end of 2 hours; 3 hours is the absolute maximum time limit.

Content

The examination covers the thesis proposal itself and closely related topics. The student must be able to defend the scientific motivation and feasibility of the thesis, as well as demonstrate sufficient mastery of closely related topics to be able to begin effective research. The exam does not cover general knowledge outside the area of the thesis, as this is tested during the literature qualifying exam.

Evaluation

The final grade is based on both the presentation and on the questions. The student may pass, pass conditionally, or fail the exam.

Pass conditionally: the exam committee may require that the student complete further coursework or other similar conditions. The schedule for completion of the conditions is at the discretion of the committee but must be clearly defined.

Fail: the exam may be taken a second time by January 31st of the third year. If the student fails the second time, the student will be required to withdraw from the program.

Schedule

The thesis proposal examination should be held in June or July of the second year. (For students in the PhD 4-year track, this is the summer session of the first year.)

Quorum

A quorum consists of five faculty members. Typically this is comprised of the PhD supervisory committee + two additional faculty members not closely connected with the project. Postdoctoral fellows may not serve on the quorum. The composition of the committee should be discussed in the student’s first supervisory committee meeting to take place in March of the second year (first year for students in the PhD 4-year track). If there are exceptional circumstances in which one supervisory committee member is unable to attend (e.g. sabbatical leave), and this will cause a significant delay, the exam may go forward. This does not apply to the supervisor or the two additional faculty members.

Expectations for Thesis Qualifiers: Committee, Proposal, Evaluation, and What Comes Next