Doctoral Student Exam Process: Recommendations for Change

1. Doctoral Student Exam Process:Recommendations for Change Preliminary report Fall, 2009

2. Committee charge and membership • Charge from Academic Council • Review the current qualifying examination process and make recommendations that ensure: • Standard procedures across divisions* for implementing. • Standard content within divisions. • Procedures that allow for earlier initiation of research than currently occurs. • Procedures that allow for earlier examination of the doctoral student. • Membership • Ben Amick, Sarah Baraniuk, Luisa Franzini, Liz Gammon, Jennifer Gay, Guy Parcel, Lisa Pompeii, Jan Risser, Mary Ann Smith, Larry Whitehead * The initial charge was directed at divisions; however, the rest of this document recognizes that the distinction is really in degree programs.

3. Time-line • What has happened so far: • The committee was formed in late spring and met over the summer and reached consensus on the proposed changes we are presenting now. • What we expect from you: • Solicit faculty input on the doctoral student exam process, as described in these slides. • This information will be collated and reviewed by the committee. • What will happen NEXT: • Final recommendations will be presented to Academic Council. • With Academic Council approval, the recommendations will be presented to Executive Council. • With Executive Council approval, these procedures will be adopted for the next matriculating class (following update of catalog). • A procedure will be set up to evaluate the effectiveness of the adopted changes.

4. Changes recommended • Drop current qualifying examination and qualifying exam committee. • Introduce preliminary examination • after 6 to 8 doctoral level classes. • Introduce thorough oral proposal defense • with at least one non-committee examiner. • Introduce thorough oral dissertation defense • with at least one non-committee examiner. Thorough – methodical, careful, systematic, meticulous, detailed, comprehensive

5. Preliminary exam • A preliminary exam is designed to test the student’s readiness to initiate the research process, including: • Theoretical and analytic skills, and critical integration skills. • Preliminary exam will be offered twice a year at the end of fall semester and end of spring semester. • All students within a specific degree program will take the same exam. • Students may take the preliminary exam after they complete 6 to 8 doctoral level courses defined by the degree program. • Exam can be taken at the exam offering the semester they complete the 6 to 8 courses (approximately 18 hours), or • No later than the next exam offering.

6. Preliminary exam • Each division will identify the basic core courses doctoral students must take in their first year of study to prepare them for the preliminary exam. • Intra-divisional: • It will be the responsibility of the division to develop the content, administer, and assess the preliminary exam. • Each division will develop a preliminary examination plan and submit it to the associate dean for academic affairs for approval. • Associate dean review is to ensure harmonization across divisions.

7. Preliminary exam • Grading will be fair and transparent: • Two chances to pass – graded as pass/fail. • Additional course work might be recommended before a retake. • Subsequent exams will be new questions – not a re-write of the failed exam. • Two unsuccessful attempts results in removal from the doctoral program. • Upon successful completion of the preliminary exam, students will become doctoral candidates.

8. Oral defense of dissertation proposal • Defense of proposal: • Students will make an open oral presentation of the research proposal followed by questions from the examination committee. • The committee will include the dissertation committee and at least one additional faculty and no more than two chosen by the dissertation advisor. • External reviewers provide more unbiased assessment • Questions may be directed at the proposed research as well as contextual questions relating to the field of public health • Evaluation will be pass/fail: • Students will have 2 opportunities to pass. • Passing by consensus is desired, but if not reached, passing may be by majority if all non-committee members approve passing. • If for unforeseen circumstances a new proposal is required, a new oral defense will be required.

9. Defense of dissertation • Students will make a formal public presentation and defense of the completed dissertation research. • Questions will be directed at the research topic. • The defense review committee will be composed of the student’s dissertation committee and at least one and at most two faculty external to the committee. • External members chosen by the dissertation advisor. • Assessment will be pass/fail. • Passing by consensus is desired, but if not reached, passing may be by majority if all outside members approve passing • Students will have two opportunities to pass.

10. Changes to timing and composition of doctoral committees • Doctoral student no longer required to have a qualifying exam committee. • Upon admission to program student has an academic advisor. • Upon successful completion of preliminary exam the student forms a doctoral dissertation committee. • This committee will guide the student through course work designed to meet the student’s specific academic needs and support the student’s research agenda. • The composition of the doctoral dissertation committee can change as the student’s

11. Faculty Council input • Each division will identify the courses for each doctoral program – • there may be more than one exam within the division, depending on the structure of the degree programs • Each degree program should describe the expected/typical course sequence and demonstrate that a student can successfully complete the sequence in a reasonably short time • Academic Affairs should ensure that all required courses are offered at multiple campuses so that doctoral students at regional campuses are not marginalized.

12. How will we know we have been successful? • The Academic Council will establish methods to evaluate the new doctoral student exam process • We will evaluate the effectiveness of the new procedures in: • getting doctoral students into research earlier, • ensuring procedures are consistent within and across divisions, • ensuring consistent rigor throughout all degree programs.