Qualifying Examination

Mission Statement

The purpose of the qualifying examination is to demonstrate that the student has adequate knowledge of the field and specialty, knows how to use academic resources, and is capable of conducting independent research for the dissertation.

Logistics and Overview

The oral and written PhD qualifying examination will be taken in the second year. This exam typically occurs before June 1 (see Recommended Timeline below). To be eligible for the qualifying exam, all program requirements must be completed (grade B or higher in the CCB core courses, no Incomplete grades, and overall GPA of 3.0). Students will not be permitted to register for the Fall Quarter of the third year until the qualifying exam is completed, thus, risking loss of stipend and requiring readmission procedures. On occasion there are extenuating circumstances when the exam cannot be taken within this time frame. In such situations, the students should be in communication with the Program Coordination and the Program Directors to request an extension.

A committee of four faculty members will conduct the exam. The thesis advisor and close collaborators are excluded.

Choosing Your Committee Chair

The student and thesis advisor work together to select a Committee Chair.
The Committee Chair is preferably a senior faculty member with several years of experience on qualifying exam committees.
The Committee Chair will help maintain timing of the exam and coordinate the committee decision and communication with the CCB program.

Choosing Your Committee

The thesis advisor and other mentors will typically help the student choose three other committee members, sometimes with the aid of the Committee Chair.
At least one member of the committee should be a CCB faculty member, because that list of faculty typically have the skills, experiences and perspectives that are useful in CCB student qualifying exams.
Students are encouraged to choose at least one committee member whose research interests are distinct from those in the proposal.
Addition of committee members who are Adjunct Faculty or Sandler Fellows require approval from the Program Director.
Addition of Committee members who are not UCSF faculty require approval from the Program Director.

Recommended Timeline

~8 weeks before exam: Student works closely with the thesis advisor to formulate a proposal. Often, this discussion culminates in a draft of the Specific Aims (1 page). The student meets with the thesis advisor and Committee Chair to revise and advance this document.
~ 4 to 5 weeks before exam: Proposal has been approved by the thesis advisor and committee chair. Then, the student sends the proposal draft to the other committee members and arranges to meet with them. Typically, a student will meet with each committee member ~2 times. The first meeting is often to introduce the overall concept and get feedback on scope and direction. It is often useful to share the draft Specific Aims prior to this meeting. The second meeting (and potentially more) are focused on technical details and feasibility and should involve a more complete draft of the entire written document.
At least 1 week before exam: Student will submit the final version of the written proposal (see below) to each member of the Committee.

The Qualifying Exam

Overview: The qualifying exam is composed of both a written and oral defense of an original, independent research proposal.

The written qualifying exam proposal is patterned after an NIH R21 proposal (e.g., 1 page Specific Aims and 6 pages of Research Strategy, including figures but not citations). The Research Strategy should be organized into (i) Background/Significance, (ii) Innovation, (ii) Approach and (iv) Responsible Conduct of Research. One important purpose of the written document is to provide a focal point for the student to engage with the thesis advisor and Committee members. These interactions will craft the scope and feasibility of the project, so it is anticipated that the written document will undergo revisions (sometimes extensive) during the preparation stages. The final written document must be provided to the Committee as a single PDF by email at least 7 days before the scheduled oral exam.

The oral component of the qualifying exam is typically ~2 hours in duration. The format is a chalk talk, in which the student prepares the white board ahead of the exam. If it becomes necessary to take the exam online, the program will provide an iPad, so that the exam remains in the chalk talk format. For in-person chalk talks, students will have access to the white board up to one hour before the exam.

In the exam, the student will be expected to display extensive knowledge of the area of their own research objectives.
The examination will also test "general literacy" in areas outside of the proposal topic.

What to expect in the oral exam: At the beginning of the qualifying exam, the student is asked to leave the room during which time the committee discusses the students' academic performance, rotation evaluations and thesis advisor evaluation of student progress. Committee members also briefly discuss the proposal. The student is then invited back in to give a 10-minute overview of their proposal using the white board. The talk should include: (i) background and motivation of the project, (ii) the central hypothesis and (iii) a brief description of each aim. After the 10-minute overview, the committee members will start a discussion of the proposal, typically starting with background questions. The student is expected to use the white board to address questions.

Evaluation

With approximately ~20 to 30 minutes before the conclusion of the exam, the Committee Chair will solicit any last questions or comments. Then, the student will be asked to step out of the room while the Committee deliberates about a final decision.
Based on the examination performance, the committee will recommend that the student (a) Pass, (b) Conditional Pass or (c) Not Pass. Often, this decision will be accompanied by feedback on the student’s performance.
In the event of a Pass decision, the student will proceed and the exam is concluded.
In the event of a Conditional Pass, the student will work with the Committee Chair and other Committee members (often in consultation with the thesis advisor) to prepare a revised qualifying exam proposal. At the discretion of the Committee Chair, the Conditional Pass might involve a revised written document, a second (typically shorter) oral exam or both. This revised exam will typically focus on 1 or 2 specific areas that were identified as relatively deficient (e.g. background knowledge, details of key experiments, etc.). The intent of the Conditional Pass is to highlight the importance of this topic(s) towards the success of the thesis project.
If the student receives a Not Pass, then two paths are possible at the discretion of the Committee. Firstly, the Committee has the option of allowing another exam to be scheduled. This re-examination must take place within 6 months of the date of the original exam and it must involve the original committee. This reevaluation occurs with the same process as the original exam. If the Committee decides that a re-examination is not appropriate or if there is a Not Pass decision at the second examination, this will result in termination of graduate study.

Tips for the Qualifying Exam

Be sure to practice your oral defense. Senior students and postdoctoral fellows are a great support system for these practice sessions.
Plan ahead! The Committee will not be able to help you craft a successful exam with minimal time before the exam. Reach out to committee members and your thesis advisor early.
Part of your role is to integrate and harmonize the feedback from the various committee members, along with key findings from the literature.
One successful strategy is to ensure that all of the Specific Aims address the central hypothesis using independent (e.g., non-overlapping) approaches.
Some CCB proposals involve more translational or technology-centered Aims, which can be harder to craft around a central, biological hypothesis. In these cases, it is important to work closely with the committee members to ensure that everyone is comfortable with the proposal’s scope.
A significant percentage of students receive a “Conditional Pass” each cycle, so this outcome should be normalized and viewed as an opportunity to enhance one’s thesis project.

Advancement to Candidacy

Passing the examination leads to the advancement to candidacy and thesis progression for the PhD.

After receiving a Pass score, the student is eligible to advance to candidacy.
Advancement to PhD candidacy is a separate milestone from passing your qualifying exam and does not happen automatically. The application for candidacy must be filed with the Graduate Division. CCB students are responsible for filing within one month of passing the qualifying examination. The form is available to submit online in the student portal.
The Graduate Division hosts a celebration for advancement to candidacy each cycle.
The application includes the names of the thesis advisory committee, chosen by the student in consultation with the thesis advisor and other mentors.