Graduate Program Instructions

Explore more of the graduate program...

Graduate Program

Expand All

Admission to Candidacy
Registrar
Curriculum
Qualifying Exam
Qualifying Examinations
Qualifying exam requirements are the same for all tracks including PhD and MD/PhD programs.
1. Qualifying Examination
Background and Format of the Qualifying Exam.
The qualifying exam remains an important landmark for graduate student education by examining their basic understanding of scientific concepts as well as their ability to integrate information and formulate hypotheses pertinent to their research area. As such, the written and oral components of a qualifying exam enable graduate students to develop a diverse set of skills that are considered essential for scientific success.
The proposal is to be written by the students in their own words. The student may discuss the proposal with others, show it to their mentor, and quote experts from the literature. Quotations from others must be clearly indicated, complete with reference, and should be kept to a minimum. The proposals will be run through a plagiarism detection software.
The Qualifying Examination will be divided into two parts: Written and Oral Qualifying Exam. The Examination committee will be responsible for evaluation of both Written and Oral Qualifier exam.
Students are required to take the Fellowship Writing Course and are recommended to examine the instructions in the link above regarding fellowship writing.
https://researchtraining.nih.gov/programs/fellowships/F31
https://www.niaid.nih.gov/grants-contracts/three-new-f31-sample-applications
a. Part I Written Exam: the examination will usually be scheduled during early Term II (Spring term) of the student's second year. Students with advanced placement or direct admission into the Program may schedule their examination earlier, with approval from the Evaluation Committee and Program Director.
A) Students will submit to the Examination Committee a written research proposal written as an abbreviated NIH F32 fellowship grant (6 pages in length but does not include any mentoring statements, only science; this limit does not include references).
B) The Written Examination Committee will provide the students with a copy of a grant to use as a guide.
C) The Examination Committee is charged to maintain a consistent standard in evaluating the quality of writing in all of the proposals.
The committee should address questions such as:
- What do you intend to do, what is the research hypothesis or is this Discovery research? If so, explain why it is appropriate.
- Why is the work important and what is its significance and relevance to human health or to basic science knowledge?
- What has already been done and is the literature review current?
- How are you going to do the work and is the background germane to the experimental design & methods?
Written Examination Committee
The Written Examination Committee is charged with maintaining a consistent standard in evaluating the quality of writing in all of the proposals. Emphasis should be placed on evaluating the logic, clarity and organization of the writing.
All proposals are to be sent to the BCMB Graduate Program office administrator; the office will then distribute the exams to the Written Qualifying Examination Committee.
Each proposal will be reviewed by at least two committee members who will be selected by the Chair of the Commitee. All reviewers are given equal importance and will critique the grant independently of the others. A written critique will be prepared by each reviewer and these reviews will be discussed at a full committee meeting in the form of a study section.
After this meeting, the reviewers will meet with the student, discuss the critiques and provide recommendations for revisions if necessary.
If a revised version is submitted, the reviewers will review the revised proposal, write a second critique, and make recommendations with regard to advancing to the Oral Qualifying Examination.
Students who do not successfully pass the written exam will be referred to the Program Evaluation Committee to evaluate the student’s complete academic performance. They will make a recommendation regarding the student’s advancement to the oral examination. This should occur within a two to three week period.
b. Part II Oral Exam: in order to advance to the Oral Exam, the student must successfully pass the written qualifying exam by majority vote of the Written Committee members. The oral component of the qualifying exam will continue to directly examine the student’s comprehension of their proposed dissertation research. The goal is to have the student orally defend the work they propose for a dissertation project. This includes their understanding of their research field, the significance of the questions being asked, as well as the experimental design and expected results and conclusions. As such, the oral format builds on the skills developed during the written component, testing a student’s ability to think about how to apply research to a specific scientific question and their ability to communicate their findings to fellow scientists.
Oral Examination Committee
a) The Written Examination Committee will also serve as the Oral Examination Committee unless the written committee explicitly requests additional expertise appropriate to the proposed research. Faculty with the necessary expertise can either replace a committee member or serve as an additional committee meeting..
b) In accordance with the exam timeline set by the BCMB Program, the student and the committee members will determine the date of the oral examination.
c) The written proposal must be submitted to each committee member, and to any Graduate Program faculty member who requests it, at least two weeks before the examination.
d) At the oral examination, the student will give a formal presentation of the proposal and then will accept questions on any topic related centrally or peripherally to the proposal.
e) The Oral Examination Committee will conduct a rigorous and in-depth examination of the scientific merits of the proposal, the student’s scientific knowledge, and his/her ability to integrate and present
f) scientific information.
g) The Oral Examination Committee will communicate the results of the examination to the Evaluation Committee in writing.
h) Once the student has completed both the written and oral parts of the Qualifying Examination, the Evaluation Committee will evaluate the student’s complete academic performance and will present its recommendation regarding the student’s advancement to Candidacy.
i) The Program Director will then inform the Dean of the Graduate School in writing if the student is recommended for advancement to Candidacy for the Ph.D. degree.
j) After admission to Candidacy, the student must register for Dissertation (BCMB 6099)
Guidelines for Written Qualifying Examination Committee Members
The Examination Committee is charged with maintaining a consistent standard in evaluating the quality of writing in all of the proposals. Emphasis should be placed on evaluating the logic, clarity and organization of the writing.
Each proposal will be reviewed by at least two experts in the field who will be recruited by the Examination Committee Chair with assistance from Program Director. All reviewers are given equal importance and will critique the grant independently of the others. A written critique will be prepared by each reviewer and these reviews will be discussed at a full committee meeting. There are three possible outcomes of the committee meeting:
1. Accept without revisions
2. Accept with minor revisions (which will be re-reviewed only by the Chair of the examination committee and the Program Director)
3. Major revisions required (requires re-review by the committee and submission of an introduction as described below)
4. Fail
After this meeting, the program director will communicate the decision to the student, along with the written evaluations of the examiners, and work with the student to determine an appropriate course of action. In the event major or specific revisions are suggested by the reviewers, the student will be asked to meet with the reviewers and obtain further guidance for improving and revising the proposal. When submitting a revised proposal the student, especially those required to provide major revisions, will also include a one page introduction summarizing the revisions to the application. It is suggested that the format adhere to NIH guidelines regarding introductions.
If a revised version is submitted by a student who received a decision of ‘major revisions required’, the reviewers will review the revised proposal, write a second critique, and make recommendations to the full examination committee with regards to advancing the student to the Oral Qualifying Examination.
All students must successfully pass the written qualifying exam by a majority vote of the Examination Committee members in order to advance to the Oral Exam Committee.
Guidelines for Oral Qualifying Examination Committee Members
The Oral Qualifying exam will be scheduled after the written proposal has been reviewed and approved by the reviewers and the Examination Committee. The Oral Qualifying examination is expected to be completed by the end of the spring term, or latest by the end of the summer term in year 2.
A majority affirmative vote is needed to recommend that the student be advanced to candidacy. If the vote is affirmative, the recommendation that the student be advanced to candidacy will be forwarded to the Program Director, who will then forward the recommendation to the Graduate Dean.
The student must complete the form Application for Ph.D. Candidacy for signature by the Program Director. The original Application for PhD Candidacy and a copy of the completed/revised Dissertation proposal will be given to the coordinator within 1 month of the date of the oral exam for submission to the GSBS. At this time, the Program Director will also list the names of the individuals on the Ad Hoc Committee who have agreed to serve on the student's Supervisory Committee. After the Graduate Dean has ascertained that all of these members agree to serve (and approve of the student's proposal), a letter will then be issued from the Dean's office announcing advancement to candidacy. At this time, the members of the Supervisory Committee will be publicized.
If the performance at the oral qualifying exam is not satisfactory, the student is asked to revise the proposal according to the suggestions of the Examination committee. Another proposal defense is then scheduled; this decision is left to the discretion of Examination committee members vote.
Finally, if a minority of Committee members do not approve the proposal, or portions thereof, their vote will be officially recorded with the Dean's office unless the student makes the needed changes before advancement to candidacy is announced. Usually, these problems are settled more informally at the student's proposal defense, or in private meetings with individual members of the Committee.
Faculty will grade the written proposal using Form B: Written Qualifying Exam/Dissertation Proposal. Faculty will grade the oral examination using the Form C: Oral Qualifying Exam (for completion by committee members) and Form D: Oral Qualifying Exam (for completion by committee chair). These forms will be turned into the coordinator immediately after the examination process.
Defense of Dissertation
Final Oral Examination (Defense of Dissertation)
1. After admission to Candidacy, the student must register for Dissertation (BMB 6099). A Dissertation is required of every Candidate and must be an original scholarly contribution based on independent investigation.
2. The Dissertation must be written in a format acceptable to the Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences. The Dissertation is a scholarly work that documents the student’s novel research accomplishments, independence and critical thinking skills.
3. At least part of the Dissertation research shall be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journal(s) It is expected that the student have more than one peer-reviewed first author paper published prior to graduation.
4. Copies of the Dissertation shall be made available to the Supervisory Committee one (1) month prior to the final oral examination for evaluation and approval.
5. Members of the student’s Supervisory Committee are responsible for reading, discussing and approving the Dissertation in the context of novel and significant scientific content, clarity of writing, and the student’s ability to demonstrate critical thinking skills. Successful completion of the defense is indicated by signatures of the Supervisory Committee on the signature page of the dissertation or thesis and the report of the final oral examination. Form F: Final Dissertation Defense–Written (must be completed by each member of the Dissertation Committee) and Form G: Final Dissertation Defense–Oral (to be completed by chair on behalf of Dissertation Committee). The Committee Chair will give the completed forms to the Program Director.
6. The final oral examination will cover the contents of the Dissertation and the general field of the Dissertation, as well as other areas that are part of the student's Program. Successful completion of the Defense is indicated by signature of the Supervisory Committee on the Signature Page of the Dissertation and the "Report of the Final Oral Examination".
7. The student must present a public seminar on the topic of the dissertation. Before graduation, final approval of the dissertation or thesis is made after scrutiny in the office of the Graduate Dean. Therefore, if the goal is to graduate in the spring ceremony (May), candidates must pay careful attention to deadlines and dates such that there is ample time for correction of the dissertation and/or thesis. It is recommended that candidates consult the Graduate Office for help as the document is prepared to ensure that all standards are met.
GSBS Forms For Current Students