phd written qualifying exam

LPL Grad Site

How to Pass Your Ph.D. Qualifying Exam

Successfully passing your comprehensive exams will involve a fair bit of organization beforehand on your part. As always, the best way to get a grip on these exams is to talk to people. Talk to your advisor and committee members about what their expectations and/or reservations are. Talk to the grad students to hear what the exams are actually like. We're all more than willing to help you out (even if we do like telling scary orals stories!).

As of the 2013-14 academic year, the requirements for the Planetary Science Ph. D. include a written comprehensive exam, to be completed before attempting the oral comprehensive exam. See How to Pass The Writtens page for more information about the Writtens!

Oral Qualifying Exam

Fondly known as orals, this exam is as scary as the stories you'll hear about them, but no worse. The oral portion of the qualifying exam is intended to test your ability to conduct the research necessary to complete a Ph. D. Thus it is the point where you present your proposed dissertation research plan to your committee. It is expected to last at least two but not more than three hours.

The Official LPL Policy on Oral Preliminary Exams can be found at the following links:

Ph. D. Requirements (PDF)

Ph. D. Procedures (PDF)

A Sample Timeline for Completing the Oral Qualifying Exam

Prerequisites for taking the oral qualifying exam.

You must have completed all required PtyS core classes, and your minor classes before you may take your orals. You will have to take more classes to fulfill the requirement to graduate, but not before your Orals. The University stipulates that your oral exam be taken within one year of your written exam, which is offered at the end of every spring semester. If you have not been working on your project long enough to feel prepared, or if extenuating circumstances prevent you from taking the exam in this time frame, you must petition the Graduate College to take the exam after one year. This is usually a lot of paperwork but not a big problem in terms of getting the extension. See Pam Streett for information on how to petition.

Three months prior: Choose your Committee

Five or more faculty members administer the test. The Department "standing member" is common to all orals committees to ensure continuity within the Department--you must have this person at your exam. Most students choose to put this person on their committee since the standing member will be there anyway, but you do not have to do this. You personally choose your 5-person committee with the help of your advisor and the Graduate Admissions and Advising Committee.

Do not underestimate the difficulty of assembling five committee members into one room at the same time for the exam! Start emailing potential committee members well in advance of your desired date, and offer them multiple options (10 or so) of possible dates for scheduling. Don't forget holidays and department scheduled colloquia and such, it is best to avoid those when choosing a date.

The presence of your advisor on your committee is currently a topic of discussion, with the changes to the Ph. D. procedures underway in 2013-14. Readers are directed to the following link to find the current rules for orals committee selection:

Ph. D. Rules for Committees (PDF)

One or two months prior: Individual Meetings

It is a very good idea to meet with your committee members individually to discuss your proposed research and their expectations for your oral exam. Often these meetings will be very helpful in directing your studying for the exam. Again, due to scheduling difficulties, it is wise to start setting up these meetings as early as possible.

One month prior: UAccess Grad Path Forms

Fill out all of the necessary forms on UAccess Grad Path. This will be your Doctoral Plan of Study (if you haven't completed it already), your Comp Exam Committee Appointment Form, and when those are finished, your Announcement of Doctoral Comprehensive Exam. Each form will become available when all the prior forms are filled out.

One month prior: Set up "Practice Orals"

It is also a good idea to have a "practice orals" session with a practice "committee" made up of grad students who have taken orals with the members of your real committee. Treat this like the real thing, reserve the projector and room, ask your "committee" to ask you difficult questions like those you expect in the actual exam. Once again, start scheduling this practice session well in advance of the exam, due to grad students' busy schedules. Shoot for a date that is one or two weeks before your actual exam.

Three weeks prior: Proposals Due

Distribute your primary and secondary proposals, as well as a copy of your Doctoral Plan of Study, to your committee members three weeks in advance of the date.

Suitable propositions for research may be of various forms such as:

• a non-trivial original scientific assertion that can be defended as plausible on the basis of existing data
• an outline of a research project by which a significant contribution to knowledge would result
• a truly compelling criticism of a conclusion drawn by a reputable scientist in the open literature
• an originally conceived principle by means of which a large number of scientific facts may be understood

Some example proposals from past grad students can be found on the  Oral Exam Proposal Examples  page.

One week prior: Create Presentations

You will present your primary project in the first 15 minutes of the exam. This presentation needs to show the committee that your research topic is of value to the scientific community, and your goals are achievable in a reasonable period of time. Don't forget to prepare and practice this presentation! You should also prepare a secondary project presentation (10 minutes), but do not expect to give this presentation unless the committee specifically requests to see it.

During the Exam: What Happens?

The exam must be no less than two hours, and no more than three hours. Each committee is different, but there are a few basic guidelines for how oral exams should typically go.

The committee will need to discuss their procedures (who asks the first question, how many questions each) sometime near the beginning of the exam, either before the exam starts, or after the 15-minute presentation. They will ask you to leave the room for this.

Each committee member will typically ask one or two questions, and often ask followup questions to lead you through a problem. They will want to see you write things on the board: equations, plots, diagrams, anything that shows your thought process.

The purpose of the exam is not only to quiz you but also to evaluate the thought process that leads to the answers you give. It is often valuable to talk through a question as you work it out--the oral equivalent to "show all work." You'll also be expected to be able to answer questions and refute criticism of either the logic or the importance of both of your proposals and to relate your ideas to other areas in planetary science.

Midway through the exam, you will be given a short break. At the end of the exam, they will again ask you to leave, and they will discuss your performance and vote on the outcome of the exam.

The outcome

You have two chances to take the exam subject to the approval of your committee, the Department, and the Graduate Council. If you pass the first time, congratulations! However, if the committee feels that your general knowledge is deficient or that your research topic is either inappropriate or inadequate, they may do one of two things: pass you conditionally and ask you to reappear before the committee, or not pass you at all. If you fail the first time, you're not the only one!! Don't get permanently discouraged. Your advisor will go over the committee's recommendations with you. You may retake the exam after six weeks, but you may have up to a year to redo them if you like.

Some Tips/Wisdom

( from Pete Lanagan )

When you go into orals, you will be one person being tested by at least five people who are experts in their fields. You are not expected to match their knowledge for the simple reason that you can't. I don't care how much you prepare or how many facts you can cram. You will not pass on book knowledge alone.

A good orals committee will test your ability to work through unfamiliar problems. Some questions will be deceptively easy. Some questions will be hard. If you already know what they are asking, good committee members will continue asking you more questions (perhaps on the sametopic, perhaps on a different topic) until they find something with which you're unfamiliar. At that point, you will have to show off your ability to address the unfamiliar problem.

By all means, be familiar with material taught in the core classes. Redo homework problems. Certainly know the in's and out's of your primary project and backup project.

But, most importantly, practice how to solve unfamiliar problems orally. Know what is being asked and rephrase the question aloud. State what is known aloud. State the assumptions aloud. State what you need to know aloud. Practice drawing diagrams related to the problem in real-time. Practice doing math under pressure. Practice speaking about your problem-solving approach aloud.

A few tips:

• Do practice how to solve problems aloud. In the exam, show the committee your thought process.
• Related to #1, if you have no feakin' idea how to approach the problem, frame the question for the committee aloud. State what's known. State your working assumptions. State what facts you need to know. (In some cases, the committee might throw you a bone in the form of a suggestion to see how you approach the rest of the problem.)
• Don't give up hope if you feel you aren't doing well. Few people come out of orals without experiencing some degree of mental anguish. Most committees look more favorably on someone who tries and struggles than someone who gives up.
• Take charge of your exam any way you can. For example, if you need the committee to shut up for a minute so you can think, tell them to shut up (preferably in a polite way). Just remember to start talking about the problem again once you've thought about the issues for a minute. (During a break in my orals, I was actually told by a committee member that telling my committee to be quiet for a minute so I could think was a good move.)
• Don't BS the committee. Just don't.

More lessons learned from post-orals grads: (feel free to add to this!)

• Start trying to set a date early. Faculty schedules are hard to work around, and you have to coordinate 5 of them. If they're extremely busy, double-check with their admin assistants that they really will be in town. When you finally find a date that works for all of them, confirm it with them, and remind them a few times. It has actually happened that someone's advisor forgot about their exam, and had to be called at home to come in. You don't need that extra stress!
• You need a LARS account if you don't already have one to schedule the room & a data (not overhead) projector. Make sure you bring the right adapter for your laptop for the projector.
• Ask postdocs and older grads with the same advisor and committee members for tips. You can get good practice questions that way, and some will have tips on your specific committee members (their different approaches, even some examples of what they might ask).
• Some people meet with each committee member about a month before the exam. Some of these meetings can be very useful, some are not, but it's not going to hurt.
• When you're putting together your study schedule, don't forget to leave time to write the proposals, and to and make (and practice!) the presentations.
• Most people will say that they won't ask about your second proposal unless you're really flailing. However, that's not always true - I was asked about my second proposal, and I think it was mainly because my advisor happened to be interested in it. So don't blow it off completely.
• Don't neglect any aspect of the core curriculum just because it's not relevant to your project. If you can't think of how it's related to your project, you probably haven't thought hard enough about it. Anyway, they can ask you anything from the core curriculum, and it doesn't have to be related even tangentially to your research. If they hear a hint of uncertainty when you mention a subject, they'll delve deeper into that topic.
• Don't burn out! Take breaks and de-stress however you de-stress. Stay healthy and get enough sleep.
• Definitely, definitely practice answering questions out loud. It's helpful to do it just by yourself out loud in an empty room with a whiteboard, but also do some with a friend or relative. A more formal practice exam in front of an audience is very valuable, especially if you have limited experience with oral examinations (which most of us do). Don't expect it to go well....
• Don't expect the exam itself to go well, either. The committee's job is to find the extent of your knowledge. That means they WILL eventually ask you a question to which you don't know the answer. Don't panic, don't clam up, and don't try to bullshit them. Start talking about relevant things you DO know, even if it starts out really basic. Sometimes what they're looking for is actually very basic. If you're not giving them the answer they want, they will probably try to lead you in the right direction. If it's clear you're foundering, they'll probably try to help you or suggest different approach. That being said, your committee WANTS you to pass. They're not your enemies. They know you're nervous, and that's OK. They've probably seen people do worse than you!

Another thing the committee is looking for (for the research oral exam, post-2014) is 1) whether you are familiar with the background material, 2) what is new or unique about your proposed work compared to previous work, and 3) are you presenting a reasonable, straightforward project?

UC Davis Graduate Studies

Acing your qualifying examination, strategies for a successful qe.

The qualifying exam can be one of the most uncertain, stressful, and time consuming aspects of graduate education. The exam may include a written component in addition to the oral component and follows a format according to the specific requirements of the graduate program.

Although the content and structure of qualifying examinations varies by discipline, this information focuses on strategies for success valuable to graduate students in all departments. This is also a resource for graduate student advisors as they help graduate students prepare for this important milestone.

Understand the QE

Understanding the format and process of the QE is imperative to success. You should determine:

• How much time does the exam usually take?
• What is the format of the exam?
• How is your performance assessed?

Ask your major professor and QE Chair for input. Your graduate program coordinator can also provide advice on how the QE is typically scheduled and organized for your program.

Review the Doctoral Qualifying Examination webpage  and the  QE Regulations to learn how the QE is evaluated and what the results mean.

Know your examiners

The members of your QE committee will determine if you are ready to advance to candidacy. Learn about their background and research interests.  Take a class with them if possible. Try to determine the following:

• What is your committee member’s academic training? Where and in what departments did they receive their degrees?
• What topics do your examiners write about? What are their publications? In what journals do they publish papers?

After you have thoroughly researched your committee members, and have verified they are suitable and applicable for your committee, you should meet with them.  Try to meet with them in person at least once before the exam, as this will let you get to know their style of questions and their personality. When you meet with them ask the following questions:

• What is their philosophy towards the examination?
• Is there a particular topic area they expect to cover during the examination?
• What types of questions do they usually ask?

Talk to fellow graduate students about their QE experiences, especially those who have had the same committee members.

This information will help put you at ease with your examiners, and can help you anticipate possible questions they may ask. Think of the QE as an exchange of information with your senior colleagues rather than a test.

Prepare early and systematically

What to study varies according to your program and research field, but some strategies apply to all students.  Organize the topics you will study from general to specific as this is often how your exam questions will progress, and it is the best way to re-learn material.

Ideally, you should begin your systematic studying six months in advance. However, do not stress if you only have a couple months. As long as you are systematic in your preparation, you will be in good shape.

• Review the basics of your field. You can achieve this by reviewing your past lower division courses. You can use old notes, textbooks, exams and lab write ups. Focus on the main themes and concepts. You may think that you have forgotten everything, but it will begin to come back to you.
• Review the specifics of your field. This means reviewing the material covered in any of your upper division or graduate level courses. Again, focus on the major themes and concepts. However, if there are details that relate to your research or your field of study, study those as well.
• Prepare and practice your dissertation research proposal. Often your dissertation proposal is formulated under guidance from your major professor. This includes a thorough literature review, research objectives and hypotheses, methodology, and expected results. The exam candidate is at an advantage here because at your QE, you will (or should be) the expert on your research topic. Therefore, any questions that your committee has about your research proposal you will be able to answer.
• A great strategy for practicing your dissertation research proposal is to explain your research to others. Begin with those in your department, because they will be able to give you scientifically based critiques. The greatest test of your ability to clearly explain your research is to present it to people outside of your field of study. This could include your friends in and outside of academia, and family members. The more you talk about your research and answer questions, the more prepared and confident you will be for your QE.
• Prepare your "how I came to be here" speech. Again, all programs are different and you should consult with your major professor and committee chair to see if this applies to you, but most QEs begin with a "how I came to be here" speech.
• Your committee may ask, “How did you come to be before us today?” or “Why did you decide to get your Ph.D?”, or “Why did you choose your topic of study?” There is no wrong answer to these questions. This gives you a chance to tell the committee about yourself, perhaps things they never knew before. You also should think of this speech as a platform for you to plant seeds for further questions from your committee members. Information you provide may prompt additional questions from them, so be sure to mention things you would be happy to discuss further.
• Prepare for anticipated questions. After you review the general and specific topics in your field, interview and meet with your committee members, and prepare your research proposal, you will have covered all of the potential topics in play for your QE. Now, you should begin to generate anticipated questions.
• Set up a practice qualifying exam. Enlist the help of your colleagues, fellow graduate students who have already passed their QE, or even friends or family. Present to them your "how I came to be here" speech and your research proposal. One of them should keep time for you, so you can adjust the length of your speech and proposal accordingly. Have them ask you several of your “anticipated questions” and questions they create. Ask them for critiques on your speech, volume and body language… anything you could work on before your oral exam. Try to conduct your mock exam in the same room you will hold your QE to become comfortable in the location.
• Review recent journals. As the date of your qualifying exam approaches, be sure to read the latest editions of the most important research journals in your field and subfield. Your committee members often read these same journals and they may draw some of their questions from recent articles.

Reduce your stress

If you have prepared systematically, you are in great shape and should be confident you are well prepared to succeed in your qualifying examination. If your stress levels are severe, seek additional resources . 

• Schedule your exam at a time and location convenient for you. Talk to your committee several months in advance about scheduling a time, and they may be more flexible in accommodating your needs.
• How will you respond to off-the-wall questions? Expect you will receive a few unanticipated questions and create a response plan. Perhaps you can ask your committee member to repeat or clarify the question. Take a few moments to think about it.  Restate the question out loud so you can make sure you understood the question as it was asked. Then go for it! You are prepared to answer.
• “I don't have that information at this time. However, I would obtain that information from…”
• “That is a good question and I am not sure about the answer. However, I would find the answer by…”
• “I am not sure what the answer is, but if I was to make a hypothesis based on my knowledge it would be….”
• Reconfirm the date, time, and location of the QE with all your committee members. This way you can touch base one last time before the big day.
• Visit the exam room and check that the keys fit, the lighting and any equipment are all functional and ready to go.

Have an exam day plan

The morning of your exam:

• Ensure you have reliable transportation to the exam location and account for unforeseen delays.
• Bring some water - you're going to do lots of talking. You are not expected to bring refreshments for the committee.
• Arrive at the exam room before your exam is scheduled to begin. Open the door, turn on the lights, and set up any audio visual equipment you may need.

During your exam:

• Know the time constraints of the exam. Use your watch and pace yourself accordingly. Speak slowly, and clearly. Do not cut off your examiners when they are speaking.
• At the end of the examination, be sure to thank all of your examiners politely for their time, consideration and effort.

After your exam:

• The committee will review and determine the result of your exam
• They will notify you of their decision – a unanimous, pass, not pass, or fail; or a split decision. 
• If you passed – Congratulations, you’re ready to advance to candidacy!  If you didn’t pass, the committee will provide feedback and a timeline/format for completing the second exam if applicable.
• Don't be discouraged if you don't pass the first time.  Your committee may have identified an area or two on which you need to gain more knowledge. Don’t look at a "no pass" as a "vote of no confidence." It’s the responsibility of your committee to make sure that you’re ready to advance to candidacy. 

For more information on the QE process and the meaning of the various results, consult the UC Davis Qualifying Exam Regulations .

The gathered information was part of a Professors for the Future student project and uses exam preparation material from Dr. Louis Grivetti, Department of Nutrition.

Email forwarding for @cs.stanford.edu is changing on Feb 1, 2024. More details here . Looking for your W-2 form?  Read Here . CS Commencement Ceremony June 16, 2024.  Learn More .

PhD | Qualifying Examination

Main navigation.

The qualifying examination tests a student's depth of knowledge and familiarity in their area of specialization. Qualifying exams are generally offered in all areas covered by the written comprehensive exam. It is possible for a student to request a qualifying exam in an area not already offered, such as one that cuts across current divisions. The feasibility of this request is determined on a case-by-case basis by the PhD program committee. A student should pass a qualifying exam no later than the end of their third year.

A student may take the qualifying exams only twice. In some cases a conditional pass is awarded. When the designated conditions have been met (such as CAing for a certain class, taking a course, or reading additional material in a specific area), the student is credited with the pass. If a student fails the qualifying exam a second time, the PhD program committee is contacted because its an indication that the student is not "making reasonable progress". This is cause for dismissal by default from the PhD program. The qualifying exams are a University requirement and are taken very seriously. Therefore, sufficient time and in-depth preparation must be given to the quals area that the student chooses, to ensure success.

The format of the qualifying exams varies from year-to-year and area-to-area, depending on the faculty member or quals chair in charge of each specific exam. Examples are in-class written exams, "take-home" written exams, oral exams, written assignments and/or a combination of the above. The quals chair administers the exams and the results must be submitted to the PhD program officer, as they will enter the information into the University's Axess (PeopleSoft) and Departmental database systems. Passing the qualifying exam certifies that the student is ready to begin dissertation work in the chosen area. If a student wishes to do dissertation work in an area other than their qualifying exam area, the student's advisor and/or the faculty in the new area will determine whether an additional exam is required.

Information about the Qualifying Examination

The student's advisor needs to email [email protected] (and cc faculty who were on the Quals committee) the qual results.

• The candidate student must form a committee of 3 faculty members.  A committee needs to have (at least) 2 core AI faculty on it.  Upon request, we can consider having 1 core AI and (at least) 1 AI-affiliated faculty.  In all cases, at least 1 core AI faculty must be present.
• The student is asked to prepare a 30-minute presentation on a research project the student is working on.
• The student supplies to each committee member a short report summarizing the student’s research project and a list of references that is related to such a project. Report and list of references are due to the committee members 3 days before the exam.
• During the first half hour the student presents the research project.
• The second half hour comprises a 30min QA session related to the research project by the committee. During such sessions committee members can (but are not necessarily committed to) ask questions related to any of the papers in the list of references. This gives the opportunity to committee members to assess general mastery of the area the student is working on.
• Statistical Machine Learning (Percy Liang)
• Natural Language Processing (Dan Jurafsky)
• The candidate’s advisor/s should be a member/s.
• At least one member must be a Stanford CS faculty.
• Two members must be working in Computational Biology.
• One member will be non-computational from an affected field of biomedicine.
• At least two members must be doing work directly relevant to the candidate’s work.
• 30 minutes presentation on their research.
• 30 minutes presentation on 3 papers which are jointly picked by the quals committee and the student, relating to the student’s current and future research directions.
• After the exam has been taken, the candidate will email the CS PhD Student Services Admin, cc’ing all members of their quals committee, with the exam’s outcome.
• HCI (Michael Bernstein)
• InfoQual (Jure Leskovec)
• The physiqual will now consist of exams with faculty in 5 areas:  vision, geometry, math, graphics and robotics .
• The second part of the physiqual (which consists of a talk on a few selected papers) will no longer be part of the physiqual, given that there is requisites for the thesis proposal .
• For students who have already taken the second oral portion of the physiqual, we  suggest that their advisors exempt them through the thesis proposal requirement. As the current language of the thesis proposal requirement would seem to allow this.
• Form a panel of 3 professors (CS systems faculty). Select 3-4 papers, in consultation with the panel, in an area not identical to your thesis work for you to read, review and synthesize over a period of 3 weeks. Depending on the panel's advice, you may need to execute a small implementation project. For example, a project might answer a related research question, reproduce or compare results in a novel setting, or quantitatively investigate the implications of certain design decisions.
• The exam has a written and an oral component. Three weeks after selecting the papers, turn in a 5-10 page report (not counting references) as well as pointers to any software or hardware artifacts created as part of the project (if any). Approximately one week after submitting the report, make an oral presentation to the panel, followed by questions.
• Analysis of Algorithms
• Form a panel of three professors, select 3-4 papers in an area related (but usually not identical) to your thesis work for you to read, review and synthesize over a period of a month (30 days). Write a report on your review/synthesis, give it to the committee, and also make an oral presentation to the committee, followed by questions.
• The candidate student must form a committee of 2-3 faculty members, where at least one is a Visual Computing faculty member.
• The student and the committee agree on a list of at least 5 papers in the student’s research area of interest.
• During the first half hour, the student presents a lecture on the topics in the said papers and any relevant background.
• The second half hour comprises a 30min Q&A session where committee members can ask questions related to the lecture and any of the said papers. This gives the committee an opportunity to assess the general mastery of the research area the student is working on.

6 Effective Tips on How to Ace Your PhD Qualifying Exam

It’s probably not your first day at the university and you are still exploring the campus, determining which place would be your “nook”. Just as you do, you find a place to sit and it then feels surreal as you reminisce, “How did I get here?”—from determining your areas of interest for research to finding the university that offers a suitable program, from drafting personal statements to finally receiving the acceptance letter. And as you are looking into oblivion surrounded by these thoughts, you feel content and just as you breathe a sigh of relief, you hear muttering sounds from some students passing by. What do you hear? — “…something…something…Qualifying exam!”. And that’s when reality strikes you! Although you are in the program now, you must prove your candidacy for it by passing the PhD qualifying exam.

Table of Contents

What is a PhD Qualifying Exam?

In simpler words, a PhD qualifying exam is one of the requirements that determine whether or not the PhD student has successfully completed the first phase of the program and if they should be recommended for admission to candidacy for PhD. It is also referred to as the PhD candidacy exam and is probably one of the most arduous times for doctoral students. Furthermore, it is imperative for all doctoral students to prove their preparedness and capabilities to apply and synthesize the skills and knowledge during the graduate program by appearing for the qualifying exam. An integral part of the qualifying examination is a research proposal submitted to the examining committee at least two weeks before the examination.

What is the Purpose of a PhD Qualifying Exam?

A PhD student is someone who enrolls in a doctoral degree program. Typically, a PhD program requires students to complete a certain number of credits in coursework and successfully pass qualifying exams, which is followed by the dissertation writing and defense. The purpose of a PhD qualifying exam is to evaluate whether the student has adequate knowledge of the discipline and whether the student is eligible of conducting original research .

This qualifying exam is a bridge that transforms a PhD student into a PhD candidate. The difference between a PhD student and a PhD candidate is that the student is still working through the coursework and is yet to begin the dissertation process, and thus do not qualify to present and defend their dissertation to receive their doctorate. This period of transition means there is no more coursework to complete or classes to take; it is a self-defined structure of work from now with guidance from your supervisors at regular intervals.

What is the Format of the PhD Qualifying Exam?

Just as no two research projects can be alike, so cannot the qualifying exams for two different students. Thus, rather than asking your seniors about the questions that they were asked, a better approach is to understand the format and the process of the qualifying exam.

Typically, a PhD qualifying exam is conducted in two phases: a written exam and an oral exam.

1. Written Qualifying Exam

After completing your coursework, the written qualifying exam is the first one that you must take. The aim of this exam is to assess your ability to incorporate your learnings from all of the different classes you took in the program to formulate research questions and solve your research problems. Ideally, each of your committee members will test you separately on this.

2. Oral Qualifying Exam

The oral qualifying exam is undertaken after completion of the written part. Its purpose is to evaluate your thought process and ability to conduct the research required to complete a PhD . Additionally, some universities require you to present your research proposal and defend it during your oral qualifying exam.

During the oral exam, each professor from your committee will ask few questions related to your research proposal and your answers from the written exam. Sometimes, the committee members may also ask you to draw your answers on the board, especially if it’s an equation, a molecular structure, mechanism, or a diagram.

4 Possible Outcomes of the Qualifying Exam

“what if i fail my qualifying exam”- the petrifying thought.

Though this is the rarest situation that PhD students face,  its possibility cannot be neglected. While the final result is based on what your committee members decide, they often give you a chance to retake the exam and meet certain conditions. However, if you fail the exam by unanimous decision of all committee members who oppose you from taking the reexam, you may have to leave the program and opt for another field of study or university.

But why should you be worried? You’ve got these nifty tips to crack your PhD qualifying exam!

Tips to Ace the PhD Qualifying Exam

Don’t you want to excel at your qualifying exam? Here are some things you should know!

1. Know Your Qualifying Exam Committee

• Identify the area of expertise of each committee member.
• Consult your seniors and other grad students who have worked with them and are currently working with them or have taken classes from them, or best—have had them for their own qualifying exam.
• Try to anticipate the pattern of their questions they are likely to follow and prepare your answers accordingly. However, do not spend too much time on this. It is likely, that your research proposal may give rise to a different line of questioning.

2. Know Your Subject

• Hit the library and stay updated with recent research in your field.
• Acquaint yourself with knowledge of your subject matter, as that’s what you’ll be tested on the most.

3. Know What is Expected of You

• Schedule a meeting with your committee members in advance, at least twice before appearing for your qualifying exam.
• Initiate a conversation about what you are expected to cover for the exam.
• Be an attentive listener and make note of their points as they speak.
• Ask them relevant questions so that you don’t get back to your room with doubts.

4. Know Your Plan

• Start with managing your time
• Organize your data and start writing the research proposal .
• Do not overcommit. Allot yourself 1–2 months of intense studying prior to the exam to master all the background and general knowledge you may need.
• Make your notes including textual as well as graphical content for quick revision.
• Request your supervisor or seniors to quiz you and critique your presentation. Work optimistically on their constructive suggestions.

5. Know the Challenges

• Presenting your proposal may at times be quite daunting. Hence, practice giving mock presentations during lab meetings or even in front of your mirror.
• Be prepared for technical as well as analytical questions.

  6. Know the Do’s and Avoid the Don’ts

• While presenting, follow a narrative approach to keep the committee interested in your research.
• Explain your research briefly and add details as you are asked.
• Don’t overwhelm the examining committee with irrelevant details.
• Ensure that it’s a stimulating discussion among peers.
• Dress professionally and stay composed.
• More importantly, take a good night’s sleep before your exam day.

Final Thoughts

As my research advisor would say, “There’s only one step that keeps you away or brings you closer to your goal. It’s for you to choose the direction!” Similarly, the PhD qualifying exam is that one step you take to reach closer to the hallowed status of “Doctor”. So follow these nifty tips and share them with your friends and colleagues for we know what the future of research holds for us. Let us know the challenges you faced while preparing for your qualifying exam. How was it different from the experiences of your colleagues? You can also visit our  Q&A forum  for frequently asked questions related to different aspects of research writing and publishing answered by our team that comprises subject-matter experts, eminent researchers, and publication experts.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Intersectionality in Academia: Dealing with diverse perspectives

Meritocracy and Diversity in Science: Increasing inclusivity in STEM education

Avoiding the AI Trap: Pitfalls of relying on ChatGPT for PhD applications

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

Ace Your PhD Qualifying Exam: A Guide To Academic Success

Unlock success in your PhD qualifying exam with expert tips and comprehensive resources. Ace the milestone with confidence!

In the academic journey of a PhD candidate, the qualifying exam is a significant milestone toward your research goals and earning that coveted doctorate. Leaping can be both exhilarating and intimidating. Fear not, for this blog will guide you along the way.

At its core, a PhD qualifying exam tests your analytical and critical thinking skills. The exam is an opportunity to demonstrate your expertise, and if you approach it correctly, you’ll be able to ace it. You will find expert tips, helpful insights, and a wealth of resources in this comprehensive resource.

Our goal is to empower you with the tools and knowledge you need to succeed, regardless of whether you are just contemplating the exam or deep into your preparations. This blog will be your trusted companion on your journey through studying strategies, time management techniques, and acing the oral defense.

Let’s unlock your PhD qualifying exam success together. This guidance will assist you in becoming a confident, accomplished scholar and achieving your academic aspirations.

Understanding The PhD Qualifying Exam

One of the most pivotal milestones in earning a doctorate is the PhD qualifying exam, which is one of the most important milestones along the way. As we proceed through this section, we will explore what exactly the exam entails, its purpose, and why it is so important.

As part of the PhD qualification exam, often called the comprehensive or candidacy exam, students are evaluated rigorously to determine whether or not they are ready to conduct research during their doctoral studies. PhD candidates must cross this threshold before they can become official candidates. Written and oral examinations are the two primary forms of this examination. Furthermore, some institutions are adopting a new approach in which a few questions are sent and the answer is given time to be processed. 

The Written Component

An important part of this phase is to demonstrate a thorough understanding of your field of study, usually through a series of essays or tests, which are usually based on written tests. In some cases, the questions can be broad, which means that you will need to draw connections between several aspects of the topic that you are discussing.

Also read: Write Like A Pro: Explore The Magic Of An Academic Paragraph

The Oral Component 

During the oral defense phase, which is often held after the written part of the proposal has been submitted, you will have to defend your proposal or answer questions from a committee of faculty members. As a result, you will be able to demonstrate your expertise and receive feedback that is of great value.

Also read: Preparing for a Successful Dissertation Defense

The Importance Of This Academic Milestone

Here’s why the PhD qualifying exam is so important in academia.

• Providing evidence of mastery: The exam serves as a litmus test of what you know about the subject. To succeed, you must be immersed deeply in your field and familiar with its literature and methodologies.
• Evaluation of Readiness: This assessment aims to determine whether or not you are prepared to work on complex research projects at the end of your PhD program. The passing of this test indicates your readiness for the dissertation’s rigors.
• Making the transition to Candidacy: Passing the qualifying exam is an important milestone. It signifies your readiness to begin PhD dissertation work by officially advancing you to the status of a PhD candidate. Your academic career is about to take an exciting and prestigious step forward.
• Improve Your Career Prospects: A PhD qualifying exam can significantly enhance your career prospects in academia and beyond, as it demonstrates your expertise and dedication.

PhD qualifying exams are not just hurdles to overcome; they’re transformative experiences that equip you with the skills, knowledge, and recognition needed to excel in your academic career. The doctoral dissertation is a challenge that tests your intellectual prowess and sets you on your path to a doctoral degree.

Preparing For Success

In order to succeed in your PhD qualifying exam, you must prepare well before the exam takes place. Early and diligent preparation is the key to your triumph. The purpose of this section is to discuss how to prepare for this major academic milestone, including how to develop a study schedule, set goals, and collaborate with others to accomplish them.

Early Preparation Is Essential

A successful PhD qualifying exam requires early preparation. Using this method, you can cover a lot of material systematically, reducing anxiety and stress at the last minute. It is easier to comprehend and retain knowledge if you start early, giving you the gift of time.

Also, early preparation allows you to identify the need for additional assistance or resources. In this way, you can break down the extensive syllabus into manageable chunks, making studying faster and more effective.

Setting Goals And Creating A Study Schedule

To prepare effectively for an exam, it is essential to develop a study schedule and set clear, attainable goals. With a well-organized study plan, you’ll be able to manage your time efficiently and ensure that you don’t overload yourself with too many topics. Break down your objectives into smaller, manageable steps by defining them at the beginning of the preparation period.

Make sure your study sessions have specific, measurable, and realistic goals so that you can monitor your progress easily. Make sure your study routine is suited to your personal learning style, incorporating revision, practice, and self-assessment. As you prepare, this will help you remain focused and disciplined.

Study Group Collaboration For Learning

Although most of your exam preparation will be done alone, studying with a group can be highly beneficial. Study groups provide new perspectives, diverse insights, and emotional support, facilitating your preparation journey and reducing isolation.

Study groups can help you clarify doubts and discuss complex concepts. In addition to holding you accountable, they decrease the temptation to procrastinate. Make sure you form a well-organized, productive study group with a shared commitment to success.

The Exam: How To Navigate It

The PhD qualifying exam is a formidable challenge that often comprises two main components: the written exam and the oral defense. To succeed, it’s crucial to understand the format of this academic hurdle, know what to expect during each stage, and be aware of common pitfalls that can trip you up. Let’s delve into these aspects to help you navigate the exam with confidence.

Format Of A Typical PhD Qualifying Exam

Written exam.

The written exam serves as a robust assessment of your comprehensive knowledge of your field of study, and it is the first hurdle on the path to earning your PhD. Depending on the specific requirements of your program, this phase may last several hours or even days.

• Questions that delve deeply into the core concepts and themes of your discipline will be encountered in the written exam. In these questions, your understanding is tested not just on its breadth but also on its depth.
• Your ability to synthesize information from various sources, including coursework, research, and relevant literature, is a key expectation during the written exam.
• Your field of study may require you to analyze, interpret, and draw conclusions from data. Your ability to apply your knowledge in practice is demonstrated here.
• You will be able to show a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter in the written exam. Show your understanding of key theories, methodologies, and current debates.

Oral Defense

The oral defense is another pivotal component of the qualifying exam after you have successfully completed the written portion. The oral defense will involve a panel of faculty members assessing your writing and ability to defend it.

• Your written responses must be presented and defended during the oral defense. You will be asked probing questions and asked to explain your reasoning. You should demonstrate your ability to apply your knowledge to real-world scenarios during this phase.
• The panel will assess the depth of your knowledge in this area. Your assumptions may be challenged, clarification sought, or specific questions may be explored in depth. Your academic preparation and understanding will be assessed during this phase.
• During the oral defense, it is critical that you can effectively articulate your ideas. Communication skills will be evaluated by faculty members in order to ensure that you can clearly and coherently convey complex concepts.

Common Pitfalls And How To Avoid Them

Now let’s take a closer look at each of these common pitfalls in more detail and see what we can do to avoid them:

Lack of Time Management

The written test presents a challenge for many candidates, as they struggle to manage their time effectively. Timed mock exams can help you conquer this challenge. Decide on a timer and allocate time-based on the weight and complexity of each question. Make sure you get valuable points for those sections by prioritizing questions you feel most confident about. The more challenging questions can be left until the end and then revisited after the rest of the questions have been answered.

Also read: Time Management for Researchers: A Comprehensive Toolkit

Inadequate Preparation for the Oral Defense

You can fall victim to a serious pitfall by not thoroughly understanding your written responses or ignoring potential questions during the oral defense. Providing adequate explanations may be difficult due to stumbling. You can prevent this by conducting mock oral defenses with peers, mentors, or academic advisors. Request that they ask challenging and unexpected questions, just like in a real trial. In addition to preparing you for possible questions, practice will also improve your ability to communicate effectively. Take the time to fully understand the literature and the written answers you provide. Be prepared to answer in-depth questions by reviewing your research, methodologies, and context.

Overlooking Stress and Anxiety

Exam performance can be adversely affected by stress and anxiety. This can result in nervousness, memory lapses, and difficulty articulating ideas confidently. Relaxation techniques can help you cope with stress and anxiety. You can stay calm and focused by practicing deep breathing exercises, meditation, and mindfulness. Maintain a growth-oriented attitude, visualize your success, and remind yourself of your capabilities. A healthy diet, regular exercise, and adequate sleep can also reduce stress. Support from mentors or counseling services can help you manage anxiety more effectively if it persists.

How To Stay Motivated While Preparing For The PhD Qualifying Examination

In the midst of the rigorous preparation process for a PhD qualifying exam, it can be challenging to maintain motivation and a positive mindset. It can be demanding and emotionally draining during this stage of academic life, but you can make the most of it with the right strategies.

Identify And Break Down Your Goals

• Preparation should begin with clear, attainable goals.
• Set smaller, manageable milestones to help you pass the exam.
• Set reading goals, proficiency goals for topics, and practice essays every week.
• Maintaining motivation by achieving these small milestones fosters a sense of accomplishment.

Organize Your Study Time

• Consistency and discipline can be achieved by building a structured study routine.
• Study, break, and relaxation activities should be scheduled specifically.
• Procrastination can be combated with consistency in your routine.

Ensure Accountability And Support

• Consult your peers, mentors, and academic advisors when you need support.
• Take part in or form a study group to feel a sense of community and accountability.
• Having regular discussions with fellow students keeps motivation high, clarifies doubts, and exchanges ideas.

Resolve Common Challenges

• Understand that self-doubt is normal. Track your progress and acknowledge your accomplishments.
• Manage stress by exercising, meditating, or seeking professional help if necessary.
• Take regular breaks and prioritize self-care to avoid burnout. Relax and enjoy fulfilling activities.

Staying motivated while preparing for your PhD qualifying exam is an important part of your academic journey. To maintain motivation and stay on track, you should set clear goals, establish a structured routine, seek support, and address common challenges. Ultimately, you will be able to achieve academic success by overcoming these challenges.

The Power Of Visualization Of Mind the Graph Will Take Data Visualization To The Next Level

A game-changer is at hand in the quest to better communicate and understand scientific findings. Research and dissertations can be made easier with Mind the Graph . Scientific communication will be redefined as we know it when visuals are seamlessly integrated into your drafts. Through Mind the Graph’s powerful tools, you can visually engage your audience with complex data, making it easier for them to understand. Visit our website for more information.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Sign Up for Free

Try the best infographic maker and promote your research with scientifically-accurate beautiful figures

no credit card required

About Aayushi Zaveri

Aayushi Zaveri majored in biotechnology engineering. She is currently pursuing a master's degree in Bioentrepreneurship from Karolinska Institute. She is interested in health and diseases, global health, socioeconomic development, and women's health. As a science enthusiast, she is keen in learning more about the scientific world and wants to play a part in making a difference.

Content tags

PhD Qualifying Exam: by end of G2 year

[Part of the Policies of the CHD, last updated fall 2021; see also area-specific exam guidelines for Applied Math , Applied Physics , Bioengineering , Computer Science , Electrical Engineering , Environmental Science & Engineering , and Materials Science & Mechanical Engineering ]

The qualifying examination should be taken no later than the end of May of the fourth semester (or the end of the Reading Period if the fourth semester is in the fall).  An extension of this deadline will be granted only if the chair of the qualifying committee makes a specific request to the CHD via the “ Request to Delay the Qualifying Exam " form.  If a student is transferring between advisors and does not have a chair of their qualifying committee, the student can make the extension request to the DGS. A recommendation that the examination be held within a few weeks after that deadline as a matter of mutual convenience, or for good and sufficient reasons during the period June through September following the second year of graduate study, will normally be routinely approved, provided the student has a cumulative average grade better than 3.00 (“B”). Marginal students, or postponement beyond the end of September in the fifth semester, will receive careful scrutiny as to the reasons behind the recommendation.

If a student has not received approval for an extension and does not complete the qualifying examination by the deadline of end of May of the fourth semester (or the end of the Reading Period if the fourth semester is in the fall), SEAS may put the student in unsatisfactory (UNSAT) progress status with GSAS. At that time the CHD will determine whether the student should lose their monthly research funding support, and whether tuition for the following semester is not to be paid, potentially blocking registration for the following semester.

Exam Committee and Scheduling

The qualifying committee is comprised of four committee members: the research advisor, the research advisor’s nominee, the student’s nominee, and the Dean’s Nominee (assigned by the CHD).  The members of the qualifying committee should be Harvard faculty members, but on occasion MIT faculty members or other technical professionals of comparable stature may serve in this capacity with the approval of the CHD.  The qualifying committee so constituted should include at least two SEAS faculty members, at least one of whom should be a senior faculty member (i.e., a full professor).  Usually, the research advisor serves as chair of the qualifying committee; but if the research advisor is not a Harvard faculty member, the research advisor will serve as co-chair with a SEAS faculty member.  Area-specific exam guidelines may specify that the Dean's Nominee is to chair the exam.

[Ed. note: students, be sure to ask your hoped-for advisor's and student's nominees whether they're willing to serve on your qualifying committee before listing them on your Program Plan.]

Approval of the final program plan and the identification of the Dean’s nominee by the CHD will permit the student to schedule the qualifying examination.  Once the student has agreed upon a time for the examination with all members of the qualifying committee, the student is responsible for contacting the Office of Academic Programs ( [email protected] ) at least two weeks in advance in order to prepare the exam paperwork, and, if needed, to schedule a room. 

The Qualifying Exam is a major milestone en route to the PhD and an important opportunity for the student to engage with their faculty committee and receive formal feedback on their progress. As such, SEAS expects the student and committee to meet together in person for the exam. If after attempting to schedule a time for the full committee to meet together in person it appears that no such time can be found, the student should consult with the Office of Academic Programs about alternatives, possibly including that one or more committee members attend remotely. In all cases the student should take the exam in a classroom or seminar room that includes a blackboard or whiteboard that they can use while answering questions, with sufficient videoconferencing for any remote-attending committee member to view it clearly.

Specifics of the Exam

The qualifying examination has the dual purpose of verifying the adequacy of the student's preparation for undertaking research in his/her chosen field, and of assessing his/her ability to synthesize the technical knowledge already acquired.  The purpose of the examination is not to reassess the student's performance in formal courses; however, evaluation of the student's general knowledge in the major field is appropriate.  The basic judgment to be made is whether the student has demonstrated sufficient mastery of the intellectual skills necessary to conduct research so that a confident prediction can be made that an acceptable doctoral dissertation will be forthcoming in timely fashion.  These skills include the ability to pull together scientific ideas, to formulate technical questions, to recognize answers thereto and to make reasonable judgments on how to seek answers to such questions.

The format of the qualifying examination ordinarily is a two-hour oral examination devoted to the presentation and discussion of one or more potential dissertation topics and to more general questions.  The intent is to test the student's comprehension of his/her chosen research field and to probe the limits of the student's technical knowledge in related areas.  Various groups within SEAS have different customs with regard to the detailed nature of the qualifying examination.  For area-specific exam guidelines, see the Graduate Program Degree Requirements page in each academic area. One role of the Dean's nominee is to assure that comparable standards are applied throughout SEAS.  The qualifying committee should agree among themselves as to what is expected of the student, who should reach out to the committee members in advance of the examination regarding the committee’s expectations.

The qualifying committee may pass or fail the student, or may judge the performance to be inconclusive.  Within its discretion, the committee may stipulate further requirements, such as additional course work, a written examination or presentation of a research proposal, as conditions that must be satisfied.  The research committee (see below) will determine whether these conditions have been met, and so report to the CHD.  Failure means that the student may not re-register, thus terminating degree candidacy.  In the case of an inconclusive performance, after consultation with his/her potential research advisor, the student may schedule a second examination, which must be conclusive. The qualifying committee should explain to the student and report to the CHD its reasons for judging the performance to be inadequate and for granting a second examination.

Students who change degree areas

Students who chose to switch degree areas within SEAS after completing their qualifying exam are ordinarily required to take a qualifying exam in the new area (for example, within Engineering Sciences from Bioengineering to Electrical Engineering or between degrees such as from Engineering Sciences to Applied Physics).  The qualifying exam committee for this exam should appropriately reflect the new degree path. Students must first seek approval of the Director of Graduate Studies and the CHD in the area they wish to transfer and must submit a final program plan for the new degree area to be reviewed and approved by the CHD.

In Academic Programs

• Non-Resident and Part-Time Study
• CHD Meeting Schedule
• PhD Overview and Timeline
• PhD Course Requirements
• PhD Program Plans
• Teaching: G2 year
• Qualifying Exam: by end of G2 year
• Research Advisors, Committees, and Meetings
• Dissertation and Final Oral Exam
• SM and ME Course Requirements
• SM and ME Program Plans
• Masters Thesis and Supervisor
• SM degree en route to the PhD
• Graduate Student Forms
• Teaching Fellows
• External Fellowships List
• COVID-19 Graduate Program Changes (archived)

PhD Qualifying Exam

Quals form :  application for qualifying examination, guidelines for conducting the phd qualifying exam via zoom:  zoom qualifying exam guidelines.

All PhD students need to complete and pass the qualifying exam, prior to the end of winter quarter of their second year of study (last day of class).   You must be registered in the quarter you take the qualifying exam.

The qualifying exam is an oral examination intended to provide the examination committee with evidence of your research preparedness and capabilities and allow the committee to give you useful feedback on your research direction.

Examination Committee

Your committee consists of 3 members, your advisor and two others. All committee members must be on the Academic Council, and at least two members must be EE faculty (not courtesy). 

You will be responsible for forming your exam committee and scheduling the exam date and room. Once the details of your event are finalized, bring the  Application for Qualifying Examination  form to the Degree Progress Officer. 

Room Scheduling

You are responsible for reserving a room for your exam. After you have located a room, check with your faculty administrator to book the room in Packard building or AllenX building as the Registrar rooms are not open. If your faculty administrator is not in EE (e.g., CS, Ginzton Lab, etc.), please have the administrator connect with Anna Lue ( [email protected](link opens email) ) for assistance on scheduling a room.

Examination Format

• 15 minutes for the student to present background and proposed research.
• 15 minutes for the committee to ask questions. Question topics can include the presented research or related general topics.
• (Optional) 15 minutes for committee members to make suggestions.
• The Faculty committee will then deliberate. 

Final Reporting Procedures

After the qualifying exam, students must remind their committee to submit their vote at  gradapps.stanford.edu/QualsVote . 

If there is a split vote (2-1 for or against), the Degree Progress Officer will give the results to the Associate Chair for Graduate Education, who will make the final decision.

Exam results will be sent to you via email within 1 week.

QUESTIONS? 

Feel free to contact the Degree Progress Officer, Laura Wuethrich, Packard 165 or email  [email protected] .

UC Davis Graduate Studies

Doctoral qualifying exam.

MANDATORY IN-PERSON PARTICIPATION IN THE QUALIFYING EXAMINATION - September 10 and forward As of Sept. 10, 2022 and in accordance with the Graduate Council  Policy on Service on Advanced Degree Committees , QE’s must be held fully in-person with the option to include up to one committee member participating remotely, other than the QE chair, with Graduate Studies approval of a Remote Participation Request . 

The Doctoral Qualifying Examination (QE)

Qualifying exam topics, student eligibility  , appl ying to take the qe, committee selection, not pass & the second exam, advancing to candidacy, forms & policy links.

The Qualifying Exam Application

Purpose of the Qualifying Exam

All UC Davis doctoral students must take a Qualifying Examination (QE) to demonstrate they are prepared to advance to candidacy, undertake independent research, and begin the dissertation.  Doctoral students may have no more than two opportunities to pass the QE.  

The QE evaluates the student’s preparation and potential for doctoral study, including:

Strategies for Success

Review proven QE tips, gathered by students in Professors of the Future, on  Acing Your Qualifying Exam .

• Academic preparation in the field, and sufficient understanding of the areas related to the dissertation research.
• Knowledge and understanding of the literature in the field, and the ability to evaluate and integrate those concepts.
• Knowledge and understanding of relevant research methods and applications.
• The viability and originality of the research proposal, and the ability to communicate those topics.

Information below is included in the Doctoral Qualifying Examination policy .   The QE must be an oral exam, 2-3 hours in length, and may include a written component covering both breadth and depth of knowledge.  Specific format is determined by the graduate program degree requirements which have been approved by Graduate Council.  Graduate Council specifies that Qualifying Exams must also have the following essential characteristics:

• Be Interactive
• The examiners must be able to ask questions, hear the answers, and then follow up with another question or comment in response to the student's initial reply. Committee members, individually and collectively, must be able to engage in a discourse with the candidate on topics relevant to the candidate’s area of competence.
• Be a Group Activity
• In addition to the ability to follow up to one's own questions, it is also very important for all examiners to hear all of the questions and all of the student's responses, plus have the ability to interject an alternate follow-up question. The collective wisdom of a group is generally greater than that of the individual. Further having other examiners present serves to moderate the group, to ensure that one examiner does not ask questions that are either trivial or too difficult, and that any one examiner is neither too friendly nor too obstreperous. Thus, to optimize the examination process and evaluation of the candidate, the committee as a whole must collectively: 1) experience the discourse with a candidate, 2) evaluate the candidate’s performance, 3) determine the length and content of the examination, and 4) moderate the demeanor of the candidate and the members of the committee.
• Be Broadly Structured
• Based on the candidate’s past academic, research, and scholarly record and the performance on the examination, the candidate must broadly demonstrate sufficient competence in the selected disciplinary area, which must go beyond the limited area of scholarship associated with a dissertation topic. Further, the candidate must demonstrate the capability for integration and utilization of knowledge and skills that are critical for independent and creative research, thereby qualifying them for advancement to the research-intensive phase of doctoral education.

Student QE Eligibility

To be eligible to take the exam, a student must:

• Be enrolled in the quarter in which the exam will be conducted, or if the exam is held during a break between quarters, the student must have been enrolled in the previous quarter and be enrolled in the subsequent quarter.  
• Maintain a minimum cumulative GPA of 3.0 in all course work completed.
• Have completed all degree requirements (including coursework and language examinations), with the possible exception of any requirements being fulfilled during the quarter the QE is to be held.

Applying to take the QE

The exam may not be held until a QE application has been approved by Graduate Studies.  QE applications are due to Graduate Studies at least 30 days prior to the expected exam date.

• If requesting an external committee member (employed outside the UC), complete an External Member Request and obtain the member's CV (document, not web-based).
• If requesting a committee member participate remotely, complete the  QE Remote Member Request .  
• If you are participating in a Designated Emphasis, and haven't yet submitted an application, complete the DE Application .  
• The Graduate Coordinator submits the QE Application and any supplemental documents to Graduate Studies for review of student and committee eligibility. 
• External and Remote Member Requests are determined by the Associate Dean for Students, and require additional review time.

Reconstituting & Rescheduling the QE

• Students may change their QE committee membership prior to the exam by submitting a Reconstitution of Committee Membership Request to their Graduate Coordinator for forwarding to Graduate Studies.  The eligibility of the committee will be re-evaluated according to the standards listed below.  
• Once the QE application has been approved, students and programs do not need to notify Graduate Studies if the exam date is changed - the date listed on the QE Report will be recorded in the student's record.  

The QE Committee

QE committee selection and recommendation vary from program to program, and students should discuss the membership with their Graduate Advisor and major professor.  Graduate Studies evaluates the eligibility of the committee and individual members using the regulations included in the Service on Advanced Degree Committee and Doctoral Qualifying Examination policies.  The QE Chair and committee members should be selected to avoid any real or perceived conflict of interest.

• QE Committee Chair Requirements
• • The Chair of the QE committee must be a member of the student’s graduate program. • The student’s major professor may be a member of the QE committee, but may not serve as the QE Chair.
• QE Committee Membership Requirements
• • The QE committee must include four or five members, as included in the graduate program degree requirements. • A student or program may petition Graduate Studies for one additional member beyond the number required by submitting a brief statement of explanation with the QE application.  Most often additional members are requested for students in a Designated Emphasis. • At least three of the members must be members of the student’s graduate program. • At least three members of the QE committee must be voting members of the Academic Senate of the University of California (Professors, Lecturers with Security of Employment, Professors in Residence and Professors of Clinical “ ”, or Acting Professors). • At most two members of a 5-person committee or one member of a 4-person committee may be from categories that include non-Senate faculty. • At least one committee member who is not a member of the student's graduate program, unless the program has an approved exception.  
• Students in Designated Emphases
• • In cases where a student is completing one or more Designated Emphases (DE), at least one committee member must be affiliated with each DE.  • Students must have an approved DE application prior to taking the Qualifying Exam.  The form can be included with the QE application.  
• Optional External Member - not employed by a University of California
• • At most one member may be a faculty member from another university outside the UC system or a scholar from outside academia.  

Outcomes of the QE

QE Committees must inform the student of the result of their QE immediately following the exam.  QE Chairs report the results to Graduate Studies by submitting the Qualifying Examination Report to the student's Graduate Coordinator or to y our SAA with the Coordinator CC’d.  A memo of explanation from the QE Chair must be submitted along with the QE report for any result other than unanimous pass.  More information about the QE results is available on the QE Regulations .

• The committee unanimously decides the student passed the examination and is prepared to advance to candidacy for the doctoral degree.  No conditions or additional requirements may accompany this decision.
• The committee unanimously decides the student did not pass part or all of the exam, and the student must address deficiencies through a second QE.  The QE Chair and QE committee must provide the student with an explanation of the deficiencies, the format of the second QE, and a timeline to complete the second QE requirements.  The format of the second attempt may include a retake of all or a specific portion of the exam, a rewritten proposal, a paper addressing the areas of deficiency, or an alternate format determined by the QE committee and approved by the Dean of Graduate Studies.  The second QE may include multiple components (e.g. responding to committee questions in writing and then retaking the oral exam), but requirements must be stated in full on the QE Not Pass memo.  Requirements may not be added or determined necessary after submitting the memo to Graduate Studies 
• The committee unanimously determines the student failed the examination due to significant deficiencies, and the student is not currently prepared to continue in the doctoral program.  A unanimous fail on either the first or second exam is a recommendation of the student’s disqualification from the degree objective.  For more information on disqualification and the process to appeal, review the Disqualification webpage .  
• If the QE committee is unable to reach a unanimous decision on pass, not pass, or fail, the QE chair will inform the student that the committee is divided, that the majority and minority are making recommendations subject to further review, and that the Administrative Committee of the Graduate Council or its designee will make the final decision with all available input.  In the Split QE memo, the QE Chair must include the number of committee members supporting each decision, and the recommendations from each side.  The QE Chair should not identify the names of committee members supporting each decision when discussing the results with the student or in the Split QE memo

First QE Not Pass & the Second Exam

Students who receive a Not Pass in their first QE are permitted one additional opportunity to pass the exam.  The second exam may take a different format depending on which parts of the exam the student did not pass, and how the committee can best evaluate the clearing of the deficiencies noted in the first exam.  Committees may require students to submit a rewrite of their proposal or written response to committee concerns/questions.  They may require students to retake all or portions of the examination (e.g. the oral portion, but not the written, or the proposal portion, but not the field foundation knowledge portion).  Committees may combine requirements (e.g. a written response and retaking the oral exam). 

The written memo from the QE Chair will clarify the requirements of the second exam in full, how the student should carry these out, and provide a specific timeline for meeting the requirements.  Not Pass memos should indicate one or more contact member(s) if the student has questions about the deficiencies in the first exam or the requirements for the second exam. Graduate Studies will review the QE Not Pass memo, and may follow-up with QE Chairs for clarification if needed.  Once approved, the Associate Dean for Students will write a letter to the student confirming the second exam requirements.  Letters are sent by the Senior Academic Advisors (SAA’s) to the student, the Coordinator, the QE Chair, and the program Graduate Chair.

Following the second exam end date included in the Not Pass memo, the QE Chair will notify the student of the outcome and complete the Second QE Report .  The outcome of the second exam may only be Pass or Fail, and follow the guidelines included in the Outcomes section above.  The QE Chair may send the Second QE Report to the student’s Graduate Coordinator for submission to Graduate Studies or to  y our SAA  with the Graduate Coordinator CC’d.  

After passing the QE and prior to the first day of the following quarter, the student will complete the appropriate Candidacy Application (Plan A, B, or C) , identifying their proposed dissertation committee and requesting signatures from their major professor, Graduate Advisor, and Graduate Coordinator. Graduate Coordinators will submit the Candidacy Application to Graduate Studies for review and advancement to candidacy.  

Forms, Policies, & Resources

• Qualifying Exam Application
• Remote Committee Member Request
• External Member Request
• Qualifying Exam Report
• Second Qualifying Exam Report

QE Policies & Resources

• Doctoral Qualifying Examinations (GC2005-02)
• Service on Advanced Degree Committees (GC1998-01)  
• UC Davis Qualifying Exam Regulations
• Acing Your Qualifying Exam

George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering

Objective of qualifying exam format.

Starting in the Fall of 2021 the Woodruff School is using a new qualifying exam format that applies to students seeking a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering. Students seeking a Ph.D. in nuclear and radiological engineering and medical physics will use this format through the 2021-22 school year. 

Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives provided the foundation for how the new exam format was viewed to fit within the broader context of the School’s Ph.D. program, based on an  excellent paper on the topic 1 . The relationship between Bloom’s taxonomy and the main elements of our Ph.D. program is shown in Figure 1.

This relationship can be explained further as:

Coursework : Knowledge, Comprehension, Application (levels 1-3 in Bloom’s  taxonomy), somewhat into Analysis in general and specialized fields.

PhD Qualifying Exams : Analysis, Level 4. (Breaking down material into its  constituent parts to identify elements, detecting the relationships among the parts, and  recognizing the organizational principles or arrangement of the structure). Ex: Apply to  some papers in the field of research.

PhD Proposal : Synthesis, Level 5. Synthesize general and specialized knowledge and  research methodology to develop the student’s own research plan.

PhD Dissertation : Evaluation, Level 6. Perform the research plan, evaluate results,  evaluate research methods.

1   TO Loughead, “The doctoral comprehensive examination: Fine-tuning the process,” Counselor Education and  Supervision , 37(2):140-148, 1997.

A student should be able to read research literature (e.g., journal papers) and analyze it based on knowledge of the domain and based on research methodology. That is, students should demonstrate competence at Level 4 – Analysis, which requires full comprehension of the research material in terms of its structure and its content. Based on this foundation, the qualifying exam objective is based on the idea of research preparation :

"To support, develop, and assess a student’s subject knowledge that will allow them to be successful in conducting graduate research."

Mechanical Engineering Qualifying Exam Format

Ph.d. qualifying exam objective.

To support, develop, and assess a student’s subject knowledge that will allow them to be  successful in conducting graduate research.

Format Summary

The Exam shall consist of one oral exam of the student’s subject knowledge, lasting a maximum  of one hour, based on three technical publications selected by the exam committee from  preapproved list. During the Exam, each committee member will ask questions based on the  selected technical publication(s). The committee will evaluate the student’s performance based  on a standard rubric. Results will be conveyed to the Associate Chair for Graduate Studies  (immediately) and to the student (after approval).

Identification of Student’s Subject Area and Topic

The semester before taking the qualifying exam, the student will fill out the Qualifying Exam  Profile Form (see attached) and submit it to the graduate office. This form intended to identify  the student’s research area, describe the various disciplines and sub-disciplines of relevance to  the research, and provide info on the students coursework background. The student, in  consultation with his/her adviser, selects the primary RAG to administer the exam and provides a  list of up to 5 GWW faculty members who should serve on the committee. These faculty  members should be good candidates to serve on the student’s Ph.D. Reading Committee, but  need not all be from the same RAG. The student shall submit this form to the Graduate Office  before the semester’s end.

Exam Committee

The RAG that is identified as the administering RAG in the student’s summary will propose an  examination committee, in consultation with the adviser, that consists of 3 tenure track faculty  members with an appointment in the Woodruff School. The PhD adviser cannot be part of the  committee. The committee members do not have to be from the same RAG. The RAG will  assign one of the 3 committee members as the Committee Chair, who will be responsible for  overseeing the exam preparation and communicating with the student. It is expected that the  exam committee will have an overlap with the student’s proposal and dissertation reading  committees. The qualifying exam committee will then be responsible for selecting the three  papers and arranging the exam.

Research Areas

The research areas in which students will be examined consist of the Research Area Groups in  the School. At present, these are:

Acoustic & Dynamics Automation, Robotics, & Controls Bioengineering Computer-Aided Engineering & Design Fluid Mechanics Heat Transfer, Combustion & Energy Systems Manufacturing Mechanics of Materials Micro & Nano Engineering Tribology

Technical Publications

Each RAG will maintain a list of publications within a database (typically between 20 and 50)  that will be collected and maintained by the School, called the School repository. It is expected  that each RAG will review and possibly update their identified publications annually. The paper  collection will not be publicized to the students.

The committee will select 3 publications from the School’s repository and ensure that the  publications selected are consistent with the student’s research area. None of the selected papers  may be authored by a member of the exam committee or the student’s adviser. The selected  papers shall be communicated to the student two weeks before the scheduled exam.

Exam Administration

The student can prepare a written response to the three papers that is no longer than 3 pages and  share it with the exam committee. The response should summarize the papers and address the evaluation criteria articulated in the exam rubric. The student may also bring the hardcopy of the assigned papers. The three page written summary can be shared with the committee but is not taken into consideration as part of the assessment.

During the exam, the exam committee members ask the student questions about the papers that  can cover the papers’ technical contents, the research methods used, and other aspects as  indicated in the rubric. The committee can choose to cover all three papers, or focus on one or  two of the papers.

Once the papers are assigned to you (student), you are no longer allowed to discuss anything of relevance to these papers, directly or indirectly, with your advisor, lab or class mates, friends, parents, anyone. You are on your own during the 2 weeks of preparation for the exam. You are allowed to read any papers you want, those which are cited in the papers assigned to you or others that are not cited, any books, lecture notes, etc. The only thing that is not allowed is to discuss/consult with others, formally or informally, on any matters that are relevant to your exam preparation.

Note:  Students requiring disability-related accommodations for their doctoral qualifying exams need to contact both their program advisor and the Office of Disability Services no later than 1 month prior to the scheduled exams, but preferably early in the semester in which they are planned. After these meetings, Disability Services will be in touch with the Program Advisor (or designee) to make formal arrangements. You can contact Disability Services at https://disabilityservices.gatech.edu .

A standard rubric will be used for evaluating the exam (see attached). The rubric will be readily  available to students and faculty (e.g., included in the Graduate Handbook). Criteria include  proficiency in summarizing, understanding, and evaluating research literature. Each criterion will  be evaluated as Proficient, Satisfactory, or Unsatisfactory, with the rubric describing the  performance characteristics for each rating. During or in the discussion following the exam, each  committee member will complete an examination form that contains the rubric as their record of  evaluating the student, with an overall performance result of Pass or Fail. The committee will  convene immediately after the exam session and come to a (2/3) majority consensus on whether  the student passes or fails the exam, then convey their decision and their completed evaluation  forms to the Associate Chair for Graduate Studies.

Students will notify the graduate office of their intent to take the qualifying exam at least 3  weeks prior to the end of the semester preceding when they will take the exam. Exams will be  administered during the Fall and Spring semesters and must be conducted no later than the end of  the second month of the semester. Students who entered the program with an MS must take the  exam no later than the one-year anniversary of their initial enrollment date. Students who entered  the program with a BS must take the exam no later than the two-year anniversary of their initial  enrollment date.

The exam may be retaken one time, at the end of the semester for which the student was first  evaluated and deemed unsatisfactory.

Feedback to Student

After results of the qualifying exam have been approved, the completed evaluation forms will be  released to the student as formal feedback on their subject knowledge. This helps meet the  qualifying exam objective of supporting students and should be used to guide the student’s  research, in consultation with the adviser.

Student Resources for Qualifying Exams

• FAQ for Students                 
• Qualifying Exam Rubric
• Qualifying Exam Example Appendix
• Qualifying Exam Timeline
• Qualifying Exam Gantt Chart
• Qualifying Exam Student Profile
• Qualifying Exam Honor Code

The Qualifying Exam

The qualifying exam is designed to measure the breadth of students’ knowledge in mathematics. While some students are able to pass the qualifying exam in one try, passing the exam early is mainly an indication that a student has attended an undergraduate university with a broad undergraduate program in mathematics. It is not a good predictor of the quality of the eventual PhD dissertation.

Students are required to take the qualifying examination at the beginning in the first term. The exam may prove a useful diagnostic in helping to identify areas in which a student’s knowledge is weak. There is no stigma attached to taking the exam several times, but students are expected to pass the examination by the second year in residence in order to begin more specialized study leading to research work.

The department runs tutorials and offers several introductory graduate courses (e.g. Math 212a, 213a, 230a, 231a, and 232a) to help students acquire the necessary broad basic background in mathematics to pass the exam.

The exam consists of three, three-hour papers held on consecutive afternoons. Each paper has six questions, one each on the subjects: Algebra, Algebraic Geometry, Algebraic Topology, Differential Geometry, Real Analysis and Complex Analysis. Each question carries 10 points. In order to pass each subject, students must obtain at least 20 of the 30 points in that subject. Students are considered to have passed the qualifying exam when they have passed in all six subjects (120 of 180 points) in one sitting, or they have passed at least four subjects in one sitting and obtained an A or A- grade in the basic graduate courses corresponding to the subject(s) not passed. Students are expected take the recommended course(s) at the first opportunity.

Once students have passed the qualifying exam, they no longer need to take math courses for a letter grade and may elect to receive the grade (EXC) excused. Students should inform the instructor at the beginning of the term if they elect to take (EXC) as a grade.

• Graduate Programs in Biostatistics

PhD Qualifying Exams & Dissertation Requirements

Phd qualifying exams, preliminary written statistics and biostatistics examination.

The PhD Written Qualifying Examination has two parts: A statistical theory part, developed and scored by the Statistics Group within the Math Department; and a biostatistics part, developed and scored by the Division of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics within the Department of FMPH. The exam committees in charge may be different for each part of the exam. Whether or not students pass or fail is determined separately by the exam committees for the Statistical Theory part and the Biostatistics part of the exam. The student must pass both QEs at the PhD-provisional pass level or higher, with one QE receiving a PhD pass grade. Each exam committee will forward its recommendation to the chair of the Graduate Program Committee, which will be the final arbiter of pass or fail.

The PhD written qualifying examination will be given at the end of each spring quarter and also at the beginning of each fall quarter. Students in the PhD program must attempt the exam in the spring quarter immediately after they complete both the Math 281A-B-C and FMPH 221-223 core course series. A well-prepared student will take these exams during the first year of the program. Otherwise, they are expected to take the exams during the second year of the program. Students must pass both QEs by the end of the second year in the program. At least one of the exams must be completed with a provisional PhD pass or better by the end of the first year. Failure to meet the passing requirements (i.e.,PhD-provisional pass or better on both QEs with at least one PhD-level pass by the end of the second year) on the QEs after two attempts will result in a recommendation to the Dean of Graduate Studies for disqualification of the student in the PhD program and dismissal from the University.

Scientific Research Examination

Students in the PhD program must also pass a Scientific Research Examination. This consists of a seminar presentation of a statistical application in a particular area of life sciences. The presentation will be evaluated by an ad-hoc committee of three faculty members, including at least one outside (non-statistician) member with expertise in the area of application. The exam is taken Pass/Fail. The student is allowed two attempts at taking this exam. The student should pass this requirement prior to the end of the third year of study. The presentation will be evaluated on the students’ demonstration of a sufficient understanding of the area of application, and on the relevance of the statistical approach to this area.

Advancement to Candidacy

It is expected that by the end of the third year (9 quarters), students should have a field of research chosen and a faculty member willing to direct and guide them. A student will advance to candidacy after successfully passing the oral qualifying examination, which deals primarily with the area of research proposed. The student will also have successfully completed at least 64 units of required and elective courses within the Program. More information on the process can be found   here .

Exams taken before receiving committee membership approval from Graduate Education and Postdoctoral Affairs (GEPA) may be deemed null and void. Students must be registered during the quarters in which they take any portion of their QE. To be eligible for the QE, the student must have:

• A “B” average in all work done in graduate standing;
• Satisfied all departmental or group requirements; and
• Removed all academic deficiencies

The preparation for the exam will be done by working closely with a faculty mentor (independent study) who is a regular member of the interdepartmental Program in Biostatistics. The exam committee consists of the Doctoral Committee. The PhD Qualifying Examination examines a student on the breadth and depth of knowledge expected from the coursework taken, and a special research topic approved by the committee. The primary purpose of the QE is to validate that the student is academically qualified to conceptualize a research topic, undertake scholarly research and clearly communicate its results, and successfully produce the dissertation required for a doctoral degree. A thirty minute presentation given by the student is followed by a question period that covers the special research topic as well as coursework in general.

GEPA guidelines for PhD Qualifying Examinations apply and may be viewed here . A student who passes the PhD QE is eligible for Advancement to Candidacy for the PhD degree. Title and abstract of the PhD QE presentation will be distributed to all faculty and students of the participating departments in the Program in Biostatistics, who are invited to attend the presentation portion of the examination. The subsequent question period is a closed session between the student and the committee. The student must file the appropriate paperwork with the Office of Graduate Studies (assisted by the Graduate Coordinator) and pay the candidacy fee to be promoted to Candidacy for the PhD degree. The candidacy fee will post to the student's bill and is the student's responsibility to pay. 

Qualifying Exam: Outcomes. A committee, having reached a unanimous decision, shall inform the student of its decision as “Pass” (no conditions may be appended to this decision), “Not Pass” (the Chair’s report should specify whether the student is required to retake all or part of the exam, list any additional requirements, and state the exact timeline for completion of requirements to achieve a “Pass”) or “Fail”. If a unanimous decision takes the form of “Not Pass” or “Fail”, the Chair of the QE committee must include in its report a specific statement, agreed to by all members of the committee, explaining its decision and must inform the student of its decision. Having received a “Not Pass” or “Fail”, the student may attempt the QE one additional time. After a second exam, a vote of “Not Pass” is unacceptable; only “Pass” or “Fail” is recognized. Only one retake of the QE is allowed. A student who fails the QE on the second attempt will be recommended to the Dean of Graduate Studies for disqualification from the PhD program.

PhD Dissertation Requirements

Doctoral dissertation.

The doctoral dissertation is an essential part of the PhD program. A topic will be selected by the student, under the advice and guidance of a Major Professor (thesis adviser) and a Dissertation Committee chaired by the Major Professor. The Committee is composed of at least 4 members with UC San Diego faculty appointments; at least 1 member must have a primary appointment in a different department than your chair's primary department; at least 2 members must be from Biostatistics. Students are encouraged to begin some research activity as early as possible during the second year of their graduate studies, and to use the Biostatistics Rotation to assess potential thesis advisers. The dissertation must contain an original contribution of quality that would be acceptable for publication in the biostatistics literature that extends the theory or methodology of biostatistics, or extends biostatistical methods to solve a critical problem in applied disciplines.  More details on the dissertation can be found here .

Dissertation Defense

The entire dissertation committee will conduct a final oral examination, which will deal primarily with questions arising out of the relationship of the dissertation to the field of Biostatistics. The final examination will be conducted in two parts. The first part consists of a one-hour presentation by the candidate followed by a brief period of questions pertaining to the presentation; this part of the examination is open to the public. The second part of the examination will immediately follow the first part; this is a closed session between the student and the committee and will consist of a period of questioning by the committee members. Title and abstract of the oral presentation will be distributed to all faculty and students of departments that participate in the Biostatistics.

Normative Time to Degree

The normative time for the PhD in Biostatistics is five years; a student must have advanced to candidacy by the end of 11 quarters. A student is eligible for support for a maximum of five years. The final thesis defense must have been conducted by the end of the 5th year.

Students must pass two written qualifying exams at the PhD level by the end of their second year. At least one of the exams must be completed with a provisional PhD pass or better by the end of the first year. In the second year, a student begins Biostatistics Rotations so that they become familiar with the process of doing research and familiarize themselves with a number of faculty members who may serve as their advisor. Optimally, a student advances to candidacy sometime in their third year; a student must have advanced to candidacy by the end of 11 quarters. This allows for the fourth and fifth year to concentrate on research and produce a thesis. In contrast to coursework, research is an unpredictable endeavor, so it is in the interest of the student to have as much time as possible to produce a thesis.

• PhD Milestones
• PhD Course Requirements
• PhD Qualifying Exams & Dissertation

• Facts and Figures
• Accreditation
• Maps and Directions
• Employment Opportunities
• BME Path Forward
• Current Undergraduate Students
• Engineering Honors
• Study Abroad
• Department Fast Track
• Current Graduate Students
• Graduate Student Handbook
• Graduate Degree Programs Summary
• Student Organizations
• Prospective Undergraduate Students
• Scholarships and Financial Aid
• Visit with Us
• Prospective Graduate Students
• Grad Admissions
• Graduate Funding Opportunities
• Graduate Advising
• Faculty Research Labs
• Department Leadership
• Affiliated Faculty
• Research Staff
• Partner With Us
• Capstone Overview
• Summer Enrichment Experience
• BME Design Studio

Qualifying Exam – Ph.D. Students Only 

A written qualifying exam is required of all students at the end of the first year. In biomedical engineering, the qualifying exam is a written evaluation and critique of original research paper published in a journal (article options to be provided). This critique will include consideration of the context of the work, literature review, hypothesis/design goals including underlying engineering principles, novelty/innovation, methods, data presentation and discussion, data analysis including statistics and conclusions.  

The format of the document is open to the preference of the student. Suggested fonts and layouts include: 11-point Arial or 12-point Times New Roman; 0.5 inch margins; single spacing, with an expected length of 5-10 pages. Within the selected format, the following elements must be addressed. It is highly recommended to structure the document with the following sections to facilitate grader identification of the student’s knowledge in each area, according to a rubric provided approximately one month before the exam is to take place.  

• Executive summary  
• Critique of theory
• Critique of literature review and novelty of work
• Critique of methods
• Critique of data presentation
• Critique of conclusions 

This is subject to change. BMEN 674 will provide final instruction about the exam.

Doctor of Philosophy in Civil Engineering — Qualifying Examination

Procedures for civil engineering ph.d. qualifying examination.

• This exam is for students pursuing the Ph.D. Degree in Civil Engineering and is monitored and administered by the Director of the Civil Engineering Graduate Program.
• The primary intent of the Civil Engineering Ph.D. Qualifying Examination is to identify potential weaknesses in a Ph.D. candidate’s background.
• Students going directly from the B.S. degree to the Ph.D. degree are recommended to take the written qualifying exam after they have completed five courses in their graduate programs.
• Students going from the M.S. degree to the Ph.D. degree are recommended to take the qualifying exam before the beginning of their third semester in the UH graduate program.
• The written qualifying exam will be closed-book and offered twice a year, typically on the first Friday after the spring commencement ceremony and two Fridays before the beginning of the spring semester. Students are allowed a maximum of two attempts at the written exam.
• Each individual faculty member can submit no more than two questions for a student’s written exam.
• Score ≥ 90%: pass.
• Score ≥ 50% but < 90%: oral exam required. After administration of the oral exam the student may receive a grade of pass (which may be accompanied by the requirement of additional coursework in specific areas) or a grade of unacceptable. If an unacceptable grade is assigned, the student will be allowed a second attempt at the written exam in the next regularly scheduled qualifying exam period.
• Score < 50%: unacceptable. Student will be allowed a second attempt at the written exam in the next regularly scheduled qualifying exam period.
• If an oral exam is required it will be administered by a committee of at least three civil engineering faculty members. The oral exam committee must be submitted to the Civil Graduate Program Director at least 24 hours before the oral exam. The Chair of the Oral Exam Committee will be selected by the Director of Civil Engineering Graduate Program.
• After the exam(s), the Director of the Civil Engineering Graduate Program will notify students if they have passed, passed with additional requirements, or failed. The Director will also place a memo documenting the student’s performance in the student’s Departmental file.

Core Areas and Exam Format for Ph.D. Candidates in Civil Engineering, including Structural/Mechanics, Hydrosystems/Oceans and Geotechnical Engineering

• There are four (2 core and 2 focus) areas for Structural/Mechanics group, and three (2 core and 1 focus) areas for Hydrosystems/Oceans and Geotechnical Engineering groups.
• There will be two questions from each area.
• A student needs to answer four questions from at least three different areas. For instance, students from Structural/Mechanics group might answer four questions from four different areas.
• At least one question from each core area should be answered (i.e., at least one from Engineering Mathematics and one from Mechanics of Materials/Fluid Mechanics).
• The qualifying exam is a 4-hour exam.
• Chairman's Message
• Accreditation
• Minor in Geomatics
• Scholarships
• Student Activities
• Master of Science (MSCE)
• Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
• Master of Science (MSEE)
• Non-engineers
• Certificate Programs
• Master of Science (MSGEO)
• Online Graduate Degrees
• Engineering Admissions Criteria
• UH Admissions
• Civil Engineering
• Environmental Engineering
• Research Areas
• Faculty Expertise
• Facilities and Laboratories
• Centers and Consortia
• Theses and Dissertations
• Industrial Relations
• Advisory Board Members
• Academy of Distinguished Civil & Environmental Engineers
• FE-PE/P&P Review Series
• Graduate Tuition Fellowships (GTF)
• UH-Extend Civil Online MS
• Online Programs at the Cullen College

Doctoral Qualifying Exams

These requirements apply to the Physics, Astrophysics, and Physics Education tracks. The  Chemical Physics  track has separate requirements.

Basic Proficiency Requirement

The doctoral candidates in our PhD program must demonstrate proficiency in the core areas. There are four common core areas for the Physics, Astrophysics, and the Physics Education Track: Classical Mechanics, Electricity & Magnetism, Quantum Mechanics, and Statistical Mechanics. Students in the Astrophysics Track must demonstrate proficiency also in the Astronomy area (AST121, AST122) in addition to the aforementioned areas.

Proficiency in a given area may be demonstrated in one of two ways: (i) By passing the relevant course(s) with an average grade of A- (3.67) or better; or (ii) By passing a special examination in the subject (i.e., the written qualifying exam). In addition, a student who achieves an overall average grade of A- or better in Classical Mechanics (PHY131) and Electricity & Magnetism (PHY145, PHY146) will be exempt from the examinations in both areas, and a student who achieves an overall average grade of A- or better in Statistical Mechanics (PHY153) and Quantum Mechanics (PHY163, PHY164) will be exempt from the examinations in both of those areas. For students in the Astrophysics and Physics Education tracks, the Electricity & Magnetism and Quantum Mechanics components will be based on grades in PHY145 and PHY163. A student in the Astrophysics track who achieves an overall average grade of A- or better in the astronomy courses (AST121, AST122) will be exempt from the examinations in the Astronomy area.

Suppose a student on the regular physics track receives the following grades:

• Phys 131 Classical Mechanics B+ (3.33)
• Phys 145 Electricity & Magnetism 1 A (3.67)
• Phys 146 Electricity & Magnetism 2 A (4.00)
• Phys 153 Statistical Mechanics B (3.00)
• Phys 163 Quantum Theory 1 A (3.67)
• Phys 164 Quantum Theory 2 A (4.00)

Because the overall average for 131, 145 and 146 is 3.67, this student is exempt from the examinations in both Classical Mechanics and Electricity and Magnetism, even though the grade in 131 is below A. The overall average for 153, 163, 164 is 3.56, below the threshold for exemption from both exams. The average in 163 and 164 is above A, so the student is exempt from the examination in Quantum Mechanics. But because the grade in 153 is below A, this student will need to take an examination in Statistical Mechanics.

If the student does not achieve a satisfactory grade in the relevant areas, a written qualifying exam in the area will be delivered to assess the proficiency of the doctoral candidate. At the end of each semester, it is the responsibility of the Director of Graduate Studies of the department to identify the students in need of the written qualifying exam(s). The Director of Graduate Studies will then notify the students, their advisors, and the relevant qualifying exam committee. The students and the qualifying exam committee have three weeks to schedule the written qualifying exam, which will normally take place within six weeks of the start of the next semester. Any postponements must be approved by the Director of Graduate Studies.

For each core area, there will be a qualifying exam committee appointed by the Chair of the department. The members of the committee will typically be selected from the faculty members who have recently taught the associated courses.

The content of each exam should be consistent with the requirements of the degree tracks in which the students taking the exam are enrolled, and should test the student's general understanding and command of the concepts, principles, and phenomena of the topic, focusing on the fundamental understanding, and including questions at a range of levels from advanced undergraduate to graduate level. The written qualifying exam is not intended to be the equivalent of a final examination for the graduate course(s). The qualifying exam committee is responsible for writing an exam consistent with these goals. The chair(s) of the qualifying exam committee(s) may solicit draft questions from the entire Physics and Astronomy faculty body for possible inclusion in the exam. This will be amended and incorporated at the discretion of the committee(s). The Department Administrator shall maintain a collection of past exams given for each subject. A sample of three past exams in each area will be made available to students.

At the time of scheduling, the qualifying exam committee will inform the student(s) of the format, content, and duration of the examination. The duration of exams should be no less than two and no more than four hours if it deals with material from a single course, and no more than six hours if it deals with material from two courses. The qualifying exam committee will inform the Director of Graduate Studies of the results of the exam, and whether or not the student has met the proficiency requirement. The Director of Graduate Studies will communicate the outcome to the student and his/her advisory committee, and will discuss future developments.

Ordinarily, a student will have only one opportunity to pass the examination in any given area. Under exceptional circumstances, a student who does not pass may appeal to the examination committee for an opportunity to take a second examination.

Your browser is unsupported

We recommend using the latest version of IE11, Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari.

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

Phd qualifying exam, what is the qualifying examination heading link copy link.

All Ph.D. students must take and pass a written qualifying examination in order to advance to doctoral candidacy. The qualifying exam is at the level of advanced undergraduate courses and many resources are available to students to aid in preparing for the exams, including previous years’ exams.

Please note all students, regardless of their academic standing, are eligible to take the qualifying exam.

Get More Info Heading link Copy link

• Document icon UIC Graduate Student Handbook
• Document icon Dept. of Physics Graduate Handbook
• Edit icon Past exam questions and solutions

Examination schedule Heading link Copy link

Please note: heading link copy link, all exams will be held in sel 2294. note that sel doors will be locked during this week. sel building access will be added to your i-card when you register for the exams with james nell., additional background and preparation materials heading link copy link.

The following list of textbooks should give you an indication of the minimum level at which you should prepare yourself for the qualifying exam. Remember that qualifying problems are typically at the level of the more difficult homework problems of our 400-level courses offered at UIC. To be successful at the qualifying exam both a solid understanding of the material and analytical skills are necessary. The latter requires basic mathematics and practicing problem solving.

• Fowles, Analytical Mechanics
• Marion and Thornton, Classical Dynamics and Systems
• R. Becker, Introduction to Theoretical Mechanics

Electromagnetism

• Griffiths, Introduction to Electrodynamics
• Reitz, Milford and Christie, Foundations of Electromagnetic Theory

Quantum Mechanics

• Griffiths, Introduction to Quantum Mechanics
• Amit Goswami, Quantum Mechanics
• Stephen Gasiorowicz, Quantum Physics
• N. Zettili, Quantum Mechanics
• Liboff, Introductory Quantum Mechanics

Thermodynamics, Statistical Mechanics

• Adkins, Equilibrium Thermodynamics
• Daniel Schroeder, An Introduction to Thermal Physics
• Reif, Statistical Mechanics
• Kroemer and Kittel, Thermal Physics

UCCS Community

• Current Students
• Faculty Staff
• Alumni & Friends
• Parents & Families

Schools and Colleges

• College of Business
• College of Education

College of Engineering and Applied Science

• College of Letters, Arts & Sciences
• College of Public Service
• Graduate School
• Helen and Arthur E. Johnson Beth-El College of Nursing and Health Sciences

Quick Links

• Search for Programs & Careers
• Academic Advising
• Ent Center for the Arts
• Kraemer Family Library
• Military and Veteran Affairs
• myUCCS Portal
• Campus Email
• Microsoft 365
• Mountain Lion Connect
• Support Network: Students
• Support Network: Faculty
• Account Help
• Status Board

Department of Computer Science

Computer science phd written qualifier information, computer science.

A PhD student needs to demonstrate proficiency in three broad areas, Hardware, Software and Theory, before embarking upon PhD research. These areas are further broken down into four topics, Operating Systems (Software), Software Engineering (Software), Algorithms (Theory), and Architecture (Hardware). In particular, proficiency in these topics must be demonstrated by passing sections of the Written Qualifying Examination or by taking courses corresponding to the topics. The Department teaches graduate courses corresponding to each of the four topics above: CS 5500 Operating Systems, CS 5300 Software Engineering, CS 5720 Algorithms, and CS 5200 Architecture. 

The Written Qualifying Examination is given two times during the year: at the beginning of each of the Fall and Spring semesters. It is an in-person exam where one hour is allotted for each of the four topics listed above: Operating Systems, Software Engineering, Algorithms, and Architecture. 

A student must qualify in all four topics either by passing a section of the Written Qualifying Examination or by getting a grade of A- or above in the corresponding course. 

Each PhD student must take the Written Qualifying Examination the first time it is given after the student has been at UCCS for a semester. The student may have taken some courses in the first semester already, and the Written Qualifying Examination needs to be taken for each topic from the list above in which the student has not already qualified by receiving a grade of at least A-. This is to help the student decide which (additional) classes from the list above the student the student needs to take going forward. A student who passes a certain individual topic in the Written Qualifying Examination will be waived from taking the corresponding course. However, the total number of graduate credits and courses the student has to take in the PhD program will not change. 

A student having any sponsorship via the advisor's research funding or departmental teaching must qualify on all four topics by the end of the second year after admission to the PhD program. Other PhD students must qualify on all four topics by the end of the third year after admission to the program.

A course can be retaken once to qualify on a topic although all courses taken will be on UCCS transcript. A student may transfer in classes after successfully completing the first semester at UCCS, to include possibly qualifying examination classes. Such classes must be from a US-based R1/R2 university as defined by Carnegie Foundation's Research Universities. In the case a student requests to use coursework taken at a non-R1/R2 institution or an institution outside the US, the CS PhD Program Director, in consultation with CS-PPC will make the decision.

A student who has not qualified on all four topics within the time stated above will be dismissed from the PhD program.

The written qualifying examination consists of four distinct topics, CS 5220   Computer Communication, CS 5910  Fundamentals of Network & Computer Security, CS 5920 Applied Cryptography, and CS 5950 Homeland Security & Cyber Security . The examination is formally defined by the syllabus of material it will cover. Students may take courses to help prepare for the examination, but the syllabus, not the course, defines the expectations for the exam. Students should be aware that the standard will be all self study as if no courses exist in the area. 

The exam takes place twice a year for all students in May and December.  

A student can take the examination up to two times: Students only need to retake the failed topics in the subsequent attempt. Students having any sponsorship via the advisor’s research funding or departmental teaching should pass all topics by the end of the second year after admission to the program. Other PhD students should pass all topics by the end of the third year after admission to the program. The advisor or the program director may request one additional year and one more attempt for a student to take the written examination with a sound reason; for example, the student has made significant progress in research with good publication(s). The request needs the approval of the PhD-Security program committee.

Waiver to the written qualifying exam may be given if the student has passed the courses of the four qualifying exam topics at UCCS with a minimum average GPA of 3.75. The four classes are: CS 5220 Computer Communication, CS 5910 Fundamentals of Network & Computer Security, CS 5920 Applied Cryptography, and CS 5950 Homeland Security & Cyber Security . The program committee will decide if the grade of a transferred class can be used. Courses cannot be retaken to increase GPA in order to qualify for the waiver.

PhD Written Qualifying Exam