Environmental & Molecular Toxicology

Ph.D. Preliminary Exam Guidelines

Objective The overall objective of the preliminary examination for advancement to Ph.D. candidacy should assess whether a graduate student has the capacity and promise: ii. to understand the basic science of environmental and molecular toxicology; iii. to be a creative and critical thinker; iv. to understand the scientific literature; v. to conduct original and independent research; and vi. to communicate the ideas and results of experiments.

Thus, the ideal examination format would select for these characteristics and prepare the student for the selective pressures that will be encountered upon completing the Environmental and Molecular Toxicology Ph.D. degree program. In order to maintain high standards and produce quality graduate students, the examination must be rigorous and challenging. In addition, the exam format should set specific limits on the amount of time that the student dedicates to this process.

The Graduate School Survival Guide contains important information such as:

• how many people must be on your committee
• deadlines for selecting your committee members
• procedures to follow to get an M.S. or Ph.D.
• how to schedule your exams
• how to prepare your thesis.

Exam Format

The preliminary examination format outlined below consists of both oral and written elements. This examination must be completed no later than the end of the 8th academic term (not including summer terms) after entering the program. In most cases, the student would schedule the exam in the fall term of the third year of residence, although students may take the exam earlier, after completing at least one year in the program. The examination consists of a written and oral presentation of a research proposal that cannot be closely related to the student's thesis project. As outlined, the student's ability to develop, research, and defend original scientific ideas would be evaluated. The student is expected to demonstrate a capacity for critical thinking and a command of the specific field of focus. In addition, the student's general knowledge of environmental and molecular toxicology would be evaluated.

Procedural Outline Research Proposal (written/oral)

1. Student submits outline descriptions (required elements listed below) of two potential research projects. The subject of each project must be chosen by the student based on their knowledge and review of the literature, and must describe original, hypothesis-driven research. The proposed projects cannot have been defined previously in published or unpublished form (i.e. manuscript, abstract, database of funded projects, submitted grant application, etc.), or cannot be known to be in progress. Proposed research also must not be closely related to the thesis research of the student. "Closely related" is defined as any research that conceivably could be part of the student's thesis or that conceivably might be initiated by the student's major professor.

Project outlines (limited to 1 page each) must include:

2. The student's graduate committee reviews both outlines and approves one topic to be developed into a written proposal. The research topic is chosen based on originality, quality, potential significance, and likelihood of expanding the student's education and training. Approval of the topic would occur within one week after the outlines are submitted. During this period the outlines would be returned to the student, and the student would receive feedback from the committee concerning the quality and design of the outlined projects. Major strengths and weaknesses in the experimental design or rationale would be identified.
3. Student develops a written research proposal using the format and topic guidelines of application for the EPA, NIH, NSF, or other appropriate granting agency. The written proposal must be completed and returned to the committee within 4 weeks after the topic was approved. The scope of the project will be equivalent to that of a "pilot project" proposal and if conducted would be expected to take approximately 1 year of research time. The proposal is limited in length to ten pages of double-spaced text (12 point font with 0.5 inch margins), and must include the following elements:

4. The oral exam should be scheduled within 2 weeks of completion of the written proposal. This deadline can be extended with the approval of the student's graduate committee.
5. During the exam the student would present the research plan and defend the experimental approach. Presentation would involve a seminar format with slides/overheads and would be expected to last no longer than 30 min. Following the presentation, the student would be judged on the soundness of the hypothesis, their understanding of the subject matter, their ability to defend the proposed experimental design, and their general knowledge of the field of environmental and molecular toxicology. The exam is expected to last approximately 2 hours, and is limited in length to 3 hours.

Examination Committee:

The examination committee is the graduate student's doctoral committee. The doctoral committee consists of a minimum of five members of the graduate faculty, including at least two members from the major department and a representative of the Graduate Council. If a minor is declared, the committee must include a member from the minor department. All committee members must be on the graduate faculty with appropriate authorization to serve on the student's committee. The major professor would serve as the chairperson of the committee to oversee the exam. The decision concerning whether the student merits advancement to Ph.D. candidacy would be the responsibility of the examination committee.

Evaluation:

The basic question for the committee is whether or not they believe the student is adequately prepared to conduct doctoral level research and has a good chance of successfully completing such research. Following a discussion of the student's performance on the examination, each committee member is then asked to vote on the basic question. It is appropriate for secret ballots to be used, and secret ballots must be used if requested by any committee member.

If there is one negative vote on this question, the student will have passed. If there are two or more negative votes on this question, the student has not passed.

If the committee decision is that the student has not passed the examination, the committee must then decide whether or not to allow the student to take a re-examination. If the majority of the committee votes in favor of a re-examination, the recommendation for re-examination should be recorded. In addition, the committee must set a time interval that must elapse before the re-examination is permitted. If the majority of the committee votes against a re-examination, the recommendation to terminate the student's work toward this degree should be recorded.