QUALIFYING EXAM PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS AND GRADING

1. QUALIFYING EXAM PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS AND GRADING 2004 Ian Waitz

2. WRITTEN ASSESSMENTS OF STUDENTS • Faculty endorsers are required to provide written assessments of the students prior to exam • Assessments to be done at time form is signed (or exam is not scheduled) • How long and in what capacity have you known the student? • Relative to X# of masters students you have worked directly with this student ranks where? • Comment on specific strengths and weaknesses of the applicant that may bear on the success of the student as a doctoral candidate

3. QUALIFYING EXAM STRUCTURE (1) Written • 2 Questions from Column A • Mathematics (Discrete OR Continuous) • Physics (Dynamics OR Fields) • 3 Questions from Column B • Autonomy, Communications and Networks, Control, Fluid Mechanics, Human Factors Eng., Propulsion and Thermodynamics, Software Eng., Struct. & Matls, Vehicle Design & Performance • Total 5 written questions (2) Oral • 2 Questions from • Communications and Networks, Control, Fluid Mechanics, Humans and Automation, Software Eng., Structures and Materials (3) Research Presentation • Research paper (from a list of 5 topic areas) OR • Personal Research or Design Project

4. TEST OBJECTIVES • Written questions evaluate knowledge and understanding of concepts, ability to apply tools • Oral questions assess candidate’s conceptual understanding, ability to reason, problem-solving skills • Research Presentation (20 min) + Q&A (20 min) to assess candidate’s understanding of how their research fits in a broader context

5. COMMON GRADING GUIDELINES • Strong Pass ≥ 9.0: Demonstrated excellent performance at a level at or beyond expectations for a student who is ready to begin a doctoral program • 9.0 > Pass ≥ 7.5: Demonstrated good performance at a level consistent with expectations for a student who is ready to begin a doctoral program • 7.5 > Marginal Pass ≥ 7.0: Demonstrated minimally acceptable performance for a student who is ready to begin a doctoral program • 7.0 > Marginal Fail ≥ 6.0: Demonstrated some understanding expected of a student who is ready to begin a doctoral program, but further preparation would be suggested • 6.0 > Clear Fail: Demonstrated little or no understanding expected of a student who is ready to begin a doctoral program; further preparation required

6. RESEARCH PRESENTATION GRADING • Assessment is based upon five criteria: • Can explain the context of the research and its importance to the field • Can describe related work and relationship to current research • Can clearly describe the approach and major findings • Can identify underlying assumptions and limitations of the research • Clarity of presentation • Criteria also apply for grading paper reviews • Professional presentation is expected. Style is not graded explicitly, but it is implicit in achieving each of the five criteria above • Ability to respond to questions should be reflected in the scores for each of the five graded criteria

7. RESEARCH PRESENTATION SCORING *Note: A total grade of <7 means that a retake will be required on at least this portion of the exam

8. POSSIBLE OUTCOMES P Pass Retake the entire exam R Retake written & oral only Candidate Retake research presentation only F Fail (not allowed to retake)

9. PASSING CRITERIA The faculty desires that a candidate who passes achieve • A pass (≥7) on all three parts of the exam OR • An overall average of ≥ 7 (50,20,20 weighting) AND ≥ marginal pass on the research exam OR • An overall average of ≥ 6.5 (50,20,20 weighting) AND extremely strong support from faculty OR • Passed written and research presentation, failed oral BUT at least one strong pass (≥ 9.0) on an oral question AND extremely strong support from faculty OR • Failed written, passed oral and research presentation BUT at least two strong pass pass (≥ 9.0) on written questions AND extremely strong support from faculty OR • Failed both written and oral, passed research presentation BUT at least two strong pass (≥9.0) questions on the written AND one strong pass (≥9.0) question on the oral AND extremely strong support from faculty Note: A candidate who fails the research presentation cannot be passed

10. RETAKE CRITERIA • Must have strong recommendation from a faculty member in all cases to be allowed to retake and has not taken any part of the exam previously AND • Passed written AND oral, but failed research presentation then retake only research presentation OR • Did not meet any of the passing criteria, but passed the research presentation then retake only written & oral OR • Did not pass any part of the exam but had an average ≥ 5.0 then retake the entire exam Note: Candidates who meet neither the passing, nor the retake criteria have failed and are not allowed to retake

11. GRADING MEETING • Faculty meet to review performance of each candidate and determine outcome • Each case reviewed individually • Written pre-assessment from faculty endorser • Exam scores • Comments and discussion from faculty endorser, examiners and any others who wish to speak • Outcome (P,F, retake) determined by majority (>50%) vote of the faculty