Qualifying Exam For Molecular Pathology Program Students

Qualifying Exam For Molecular Pathology Program Students

This document details the process for the written and oral qualifying exams for advancement to candidacy to be followed by (M.S.) Ph.D. students officially affiliated with the Molecular Pathology Program. Students not officially affiliated with the Molecular Pathology Program will have the exam administered by the GSBS.

Students should initiate the Qualifying Exam process prior to September 1 of their 3rd academic year of enrollment so as to complete the exam before the end of the Fall semester. This deadline should be adhered to except for students who elect to complete an M.S. degree. The qualifying exam will consist of written and oral components in the following process:

Molecular Pathology (MP) Program students are expected to take their Candidacy Examination sometime in the Fall of their third year of study. Students are encouraged to begin making arrangements for the exam early in the summer at the end of their second year.

The Program Director will nominate a Program Examination Committee (PEC). This shall consist of a Chair and five other Program Faculty who will serve for a period of three years. The Chair will rotate yearly. The responsibility of the committee will be to ensure consistency and high standards of both the written and oral portions of the candidacy exam, as outlined below. It is the responsibility of the PEC Chair to select each student's Examination Committee in consultation with the student and the student's thesis advisor. The student's Examination Committee consists of three members of the PEC, a GSBS faculty member from outside the MP program and the Chair of the PEC who will serve as Chair of the Examination Committee. If the PEC Chair is the student’s thesis advisor, a fourth PEC member will be added to the Examination Committee, and the PEC Chair replaced by a pro-tem Chair.The responsibilities of the three regular PEC members on a student's Examination Committee are to submit and grade written questions, as described below, and to ask questions during the oral component of the candidacy exam. The external Committee member will not be required to submit or grade written questions. The responsibilities of the Examination Committee Chair include: 1) Advising the student with respect to selection of Examination Committee members and the format of the exam; 2) Ensuring that the Examination is conducted in a fair and professional manner; 3) Ensuring consistency and quality on the part of both the students and the Examination Committee members.

1. The student prepares a research proposal to be defended in the Oral Examination. Tthe student’s proposal should adhere to the NIH R01 proposal format (see Public Health Service (PHS) publication 398, Section I.C.9). The PEC chair will provide the student with a copy of PHS 398 and copies of successful proposals written by former students. The topic of the research proposal will most likely, but not necessarily, be related to the student’s anticipated thesis project. The advisor should not supply the student with their own grant proposals for the specific purpose of preparing the students research proposal. However, the specific aims of the student's proposal may be developed in consultation with the student's advisor. All other portions of the proposal must be written independently by the student.

2. The Examination Committee is selected as described above and the student submits proposed specific aims to the GSBS and the examination Committee.

3. The complete proposal must be submitted to the Examination Committee one month before the candidacy exam.

4. Each committee member (excluding the Chair and the external member) prepares an extensive question that is presented to the student by the Chair of the Examination Committee three weeks before the exam. These questions should be designed to test breadth in the general MP area and background information relevant to the student’s proposal.

a. The written questions should be in the context of course work taken by the student and the expected background knowledge necessary to carry out experimentation planned in the proposal.

b. The student selects one of the three questions to answer in detailed written form. This answer must be prepared independently, although the student is free to ask faculty and others for general information. The answer should not exceed four single-spaced pages (12-pt type with one-inch margins all around). Literature references must have full titles, but the references are not included in the four-page limit.

c. The written answer must be submitted to the Examination Committee Chair no latter than one week before the exam. The Chair will distribute the written answer, and all three questions, to the Examination Committee. The submitter of the answered question will grade it on a pass/fail basis.

d. During the oral exam (see item 5 below) all three questions submitted, plus other background information, are open to further discussion.

5. The oral exam is composed of an public presentation of the research proposal by the student (30-45 min), followed by an oral examination (1-2 hr) covering the proposal, directly related areas, general and background information, and the three questions submitted as part of item 4 above. The oral examination is conducted by the Examination Committee; the students advisor is not permitted to attend.

6. The performance on the "breadth" and "proposal" sections are graded pass/fail separately. Both parts must be passed, but each can be remediated separately.