Qualifying Examination
Download the Qualifying Examination Form HERE.
Background and Format of the Qualifying Examination
The Committee on Cancer Biology changed the qualifying exam format
beginning in the 2002-2003 academic year. The two-part qualifying
examination was replaced by a single "in area" qualifying
examination on the topic of the student’s thesis proposal. The
exam consists of an NIH-style written grant proposal not to exceed ten
pages (excluding references) and an oral examination. The
examining committee includes three faculty members from the Cancer
Biology Program but does not include the student’s thesis
advisor. The composition of this committee is chosen by the
student and thesis advisor and must be submitted to and approved by the
Program Director prior to the end of autumn quarter, second
year. One non-Cancer Biology faculty member may be substituted, if
necessary, to provide specific scientific expertise relevant to the
student’s proposal. The written
and oral proposal should represent the student’s own efforts to
identify a question of interest and to develop appropriate experimental
approaches. Preliminary data generated by the student are NOT
required. Students are strongly encouraged to develop a written
Specific Aims section by the end of winter quarter, second year. The qualifying exam must be taken prior to the end
of spring quarter, second year. If necessary, one retake will be
permitted prior to the end of summer quarter, second year.
Mechanics of the Qualifying Examination
Each student is responsible for scheduling his/her own examination to
conform to the above deadlines. The written proposal shall be given to
the qualifying examination committee members at least two weeks prior to the oral
exam date. Just prior to beginning the oral exam, the student's advisor
is expected to meet with the examination committee for a brief
closed-door session without the student present. A copy of the
student's Stanford University transcript and laboratory rotation
evaluations will be made available to the examination committee, as
well. The student's advisor will not be present during the
remainder of the examination.
Once the advisor leaves the room, the qualifying examination
committee shall designate a Chair. He/she will formally be in charge of
the proceedings, will decide when the exam is over, and will take a vote
of the qualifying examination committee in the student's absence.
The student will then be invited into the room to begin his/her
presentation. Generally students prepare a 20 minute oral
presentation that briefly reviews the background, but largely focuses on
the Specific Aims and the proposed experiments. Quite often this
presentation is interrupted by questions from the examination
committee. The goal of the examination is not necessarily to
finish the prepared presentation, but rather to assess the student's
readiness to pursue his/her dissertation work in the laboratory.
When the Chair determines that the examination is completed (generally
after about 90 to 120 minutes), the student is asked to leave the room
and the committee deliberates in private about the student's
performance.
A student’s performance will be deemed satisfactory or
unsatisfactory by a simple majority vote of the qualifying examination
committee. The student will be assessed on his/her written proposal,
oral presentation, mastery of the specific field of research including
background literature and experimental techniques, and general knowledge
about the broader field of cancer biology. The decision of the
examination committee is conveyed orally to the student immediately
following the exam. In addition, the Chair is responsible for summarizing the strengths and
weaknesses of the written proposal and oral presentation on the
examination form. The original examination form shall be given to the
Program Administrator and then kept in the student’s file in the
Cancer Biology Program Office. Copies of the completed examination form
shall be given to the student and the student’s advisor by the Program
Administrator. If the qualifying examination committee deems the student’s
performance unsatisfactory, the committee can request a revision or retake
of the written proposal, the oral examination, or both.
Here are some questions asked by students about the examination
process:
Is the qualifying exam committee the same as the thesis committee?
Not necessarily. The qualifying exam committee is composed of three
faculty members from Cancer Biology, excluding your advisor (see
above). Often the thesis committee (doctoral dissertation reading
committee) might include these same
individuals plus your advisor. However, you and your advisor are
free to reconstitute a different thesis committee after completion of
the qualifying exam. Sometimes students want to add individuals
from outside the program or even from other institutions to their thesis
committee. Often your thesis committee members serve as references
for future positions and fellowship applications, so one should give
this some careful thought.
How do I choose the topic of my proposal?
This is a major part of the exercise. The most common critiques
of grant proposals at all levels are "overly ambitious" and
"too narrowly focused". The real trick is to find the
middle ground on this spectrum. Students are encouraged to read a
brief article by our own Mark Davis about asking good questions.
Another valuable resource is a short book by Peter Medawar entitled
"Advice to a Young Scientist". Specific advice about
writing grants can be found at Science
Magazine’s Nextwave website: [http://nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/1999/09/20/2].
In particular, take a look at the article about writing
a "research plan": [http://nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2000/08/09/3].
What is the format of the single exam?
WRITTEN
The goal is to have the student defend the work that he/she proposes
for a thesis project. This includes background as well as
experimental design and expected results and conclusions. The
written part of the exam should be no longer than 10 pages (excluding
references) and should be written in the format of an NIH grant
proposal. The NIH web page has a standard set of instructions
(form 398) available on the web at: [http://grants1.nih.gov/grants/funding/phs398/section_1.html#8_research].
Your written proposal should include only the "Research
Plan" section, the highlights of which are excerpted below:
8. Research Plan
There is no Form Page for the Research Plan. The Research Plan should
include sufficient information needed for evaluation of the project,
independent of any other document. Be specific and informative, and
avoid redundancies. Organize Items a-d of the Research Plan to answer
these questions: What do you intend to do? Why is the work important?
What has already been done? How are you going to do the work?
...
Research Plan Format and Page Distribution
The PHS recommends the following format and page distribution.
a. Specific Aims
List the broad, long-term objectives and what the specific research
proposed in this application is intended to accomplish, e.g., to test a
stated hypothesis, create a novel design, solve a specific problem, or
develop new technology. One page is recommended.
b. Background and Significance
Briefly sketch the background leading to the present application,
critically evaluate existing knowledge, and specifically identify the
gaps that the project is intended to fill. State concisely the
importance and health relevance of the research described in this
application by relating the specific aims to the broad, long-term
objectives. Two to three pages are recommended.
c. Preliminary Studies/Progress Report
Preliminary Studies. For new applications, use this section to
provide an account of the principal investigator/program director's
preliminary studies pertinent to the application information that will
also help to establish the experience and competence of the investigator
to pursue the proposed project.
Peer review committees generally view preliminary data as an
essential part of a research grant application. Preliminary data often
aid the reviewers in assessing the likelihood of the success of the
proposed project.
...
Provide a succinct account of published and unpublished results,
indicating progress toward their achievement.
List the titles and complete references to all publications,
manuscripts accepted for publication, patents, and other printed
materials that have resulted from the project since it was last reviewed
competitively. Up to 10 such publications may be included in the five
collated sets of appendices.
...
Six to eight pages are recommended for the narrative portion of
the Preliminary Studies/Progress Report.
d. Research Design and Methods
Describe the research design and the procedures to be used to
accomplish the specific aims of the project. Include how the data will
be collected, analyzed, and interpreted as well as the data sharing plan
as appropriate. Describe any new methodology and its advantage over
existing methodologies. Discuss the potential difficulties and
limitations of the proposed procedures and alternative approaches to
achieve the aims. As part of this section, provide a tentative sequence
or timetable for the project. Point out any procedures, situations, or
materials that may be hazardous to personnel and the precautions to be
exercised.
Although no specific number of pages is recommended for the Research
Design and Methods section, the total for Items a-d may not exceed
25pages, including all tables and figures. Applicants are encouraged to
be as succinct as possible and reminded that there is no requirement
that all 25 pages allotted for this section be used.
Note that your qualifying examination proposal will have a 10 page
limit, rather than a 25 page limit. I would suggest sticking to a
1 page limit for Specific Aims and 2-3 page limit for Background.
I would also limit the Preliminary Studies section (if any-- note that
preliminary data are NOT necessary for your proposal) to 2 pages at
most. This will leave the rest of the 10 pages for "Research
Design and Methods". It can be very helpful to the reviewer
(examiner) to organize the Preliminary Studies and Research Design and
Methods sections according to your numbered Specific Aims. It
might be helpful to ask your PI to see a real grant application, but it
would be a pointless exercise (and would constitute plagiarism) for you
to simply copy chunks of his/her grant application into your own exam
proposal. Figures within your proposal can be helpful to the
reviewer, but should generally not be too complex. Figures can be
put at the end, but they are often more effective if inserted directly
into the text at the appropriate places. The Figures are included
in the page limit. Part of the exercise is learning how to present
your data and plans concisely.
ORAL
The general format is for the student to plan a ~20 minute
presentation for an exam that generally will last from 90-120
minutes. The examiners should be given the written portion of the
exam at least two weeks before the oral exam. Students are
permitted to practice their oral presentations; often this is done at a
lab meeting or with a group of fellow students. However, during
the actual examination the student
will often not complete his/her planned oral presentation before the questions
begin. The flow of the exam is up to the committee, not the
student. One member of the committee will be designated as
Chair. He/she will formally be in charge of the proceedings, will
decide when the exam is over, and will take a vote of the qualifying
exam committee in the student's absence. This Chair will be
responsible for conveying the results of the exam to the student orally
and to the Administrator of the Program on a standard written form.
