THE DOCTORATE DEGREE
For the completion of a Ph.D. degree a
student must fulfill both Geosciences Department and Graduate School
requirements
Departmental requirements: The Ph.D. candidate must
·
satisfy
the Core Course Curriculum of the Geosciences Department,
·
present
a Ph.D. thesis proposal,
·
demonstrate
proficiency in the use of the English language,
·
complete
a language requirement, if specified by the Doctoral Committee,
·
deliver
at least one formal oral presentation,
Graduate School requirements include:
·
2
semesters of residence;
·
A
minimum grade-point average of 3.00 for work done at the University is required
for:
·
Passing
of candidacy and comprehensive examinations.
·
Preparation
and defense of a thesis.
·
Registration
for each semester (Fall and Spring) from the time the comprehensive examination
is passed and the two-semester residence requirement is met, until the thesis
is accepted by the doctoral committee, regardless of whether work is being done
on the thesis during this interval.
·
Satisfactory completion of the requirements
appropriate for his or her specialty, as developed by the Doctoral Committee,
which is responsible for ensuring that the candidate has developed scientific
breadth and depth by a combination of course work and personal study. This
ability is tested mainly by the Comprehensive Examination. The Language and
Communication requirement is also the responsibility of the Doctoral Committee.
A high level of proficiency in English is required. Doctoral Committees may
wish to require a foreign language.
In some cases the
Geosciences Program the doctoral committee may require proficiency in a foreign
language or languages, if this should be necessary for the successful
completion of a thesis. The committee should decide at an early stage whether
or not the background, thesis topic, and subdiscipline of the candidate require
competence in a foreign language or languages and, if so, the procedures by
which competence will be demonstrated. The requirement must be fulfilled before
the Comprehensive Examination can be scheduled.
Students in the Geosciences
Program are expected to demonstrate proficiency in communicating scientific
information and ideas in formal and informal professional settings. The
important settings in which skills will be needed are oral exams (Candidacy and
Comprehensive), oral presentations at Department Colloquia and national
meetings, and teaching assignments in the cases of TAs. The Geosciences faculty
expects spoken English to be of sufficient quality that listeners can
concentrate on data and ideas rather than on the form of delivery, and that
questions addressed to the candidate are readily comprehended.
The Geosciences faculty
expects students to perform with a uniform standard of quality in writing.
Documents should demonstrate correct grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
Organization, sentence length, logical sequences of thought, clarity, and
avoidance of jargon and colloquialisms are all components.
English competency is formally
assessed at the Candidacy Examination and certified at the time of the Thesis
Proposal. A student will not be cleared for a Comprehensive Examination
until competency is certified.
Assessment instruments prior
to the Candidacy Examination include the application essay, the initial meeting
with an advisory faculty panel and subsequent meetings with an advisor, the MS
thesis/paper (if the MS degree is not bypassed or achieved elsewhere), the
essay accompanying the annual Spring report, oral communications at the annual
candidate/committee meeting, the TSE (ESL) test (oral, for international
students appointed as TAs), the required formal oral presentation (see section
below) and the two required formal research proposals prior to Candidacy.
The initial advisory panel
and the interim doctoral committee will assess the measures of English
competency available and make recommendations on remediation, if required, as a
part of the written reports to the Associate Head that result from those
meetings.
The Candidacy Committee will
assess English competency as part of the Candidacy examination, based upon the
written proposals and performance on the oral portion of the examination. Its
recommendations on the form provided will determine if further remediation is
required.
The Doctoral Committee has
the responsibility of assuring that further remediation after the Candidacy
Examination, if necessary, has been effective. They will base their decision
upon oral presentations at the candidate-committee meetings that will occur at
least yearly, upon the required oral presentation, and, ultimately, upon the
Thesis Proposal.
Most of the assessment
instruments listed in the third paragraph of this section are also effective
measures to increase English competency. International students who arrive with
speaking deficiencies are recommended to enroll for SPCOM 114G, and those who
arrive with writing deficiencies are recommended to enroll for SPCOM 116G.
International students are encouraged to use English in ordinary conversation
both inside and outside Deike Building. Those students required to remediate
written English as a result of the Candidacy Examination will be required to
take ENGL 198G, a writing course, during the ensuing Summer Session. Students
who do not receive a "B" or better in ENGL 198G will be required to
write two review papers under the supervision of their research advisor during
the ensuing semester. It will be the responsibility of the research advisor to
require an appropriate number of revisions of these papers.
The doctoral committee will
make the final decision on attainment of competency in speaking and writing
ability (if not satisfied previously) on the occasion of the Thesis Proposal,
which involves both a written proposal and an oral presentation. Insufficient
performance will result in a second required Thesis Proposal or in dropping the
student from the Graduate Program.
As part of the Department's program in
Communication and English Competency, each doctoral student is required
to present at least one formal oral talk on a geoscience topic, with
appropriate visual aids. The venue for the talk may be the annual student
Spring Colloquia series, a regional or national geoscience meeting, or another
venue upon application to the Graduate Program Committee. A talk to a class or
seminar will not "count," however, nor will the annual Spring review
or Candidacy exam. Poster presentations, although encouraged by the Department,
will not count. The talk must be presented prior to the Thesis Proposal
Presentation, in order that evaluation of the talk may be used in the
assessment of English competency at that meeting. The student must designate a
faculty mentor, not necessarily the advisor, who will serve as a resource, who
will attend the talk, and who will provide feedback. The mentor will complete a
form to be entered in the student file.
Objective: The Candidacy Examination is intended to:
1. Determine whether a student has the preparation, intellectual capacity, and professional attitude to complete a Ph.D. program successfully;
2.
Explore
deficiencies in the student's background and training, in order to plan
additional course work that may be needed. Such exploration is not the primary
purpose of the examination, however, and the examination is not primarily
a test of knowledge attained in the geosciences;
3.
Assess
the student’s verbal and written English competency.
Timing: A student admitted for the Ph.D. degree must pass
the candidacy exam prior to the end of three semesters of residence, as
specified by the Graduate School. The exam should not be scheduled during the
last week of classes or the final exam period. The student is responsible for
arranging a time and room for the examination in consultation with the
Candidacy Committee and the Graduate Program Office.
Candidacy Committee: At the time of a Candidacy
Examination, a student should have a research advisor who has agreed to
supervise the student, although exceptions may be allowed at the option of the
Associate Head. The Candidacy Committee will consist of a minimum of 4
members of the Graduate Faculty in the Geosciences Graduate Program. The
proposed advisor should normally be a member. Another member will be a
"roving panel member," one of 3 or 4 faculty members who will serve
on numerous candidacy examinations during a given year to ensure relatively
equal and fair treatment among candidacy examinations. The "Rover"
will chair the exam. The other members should be chosen to ensure
representation of sub-disciplines within the Geosciences relevant to the
student's main area of research.
Appointment of the Candidacy Committee: The student and advisor should submit a memo to the Associate
Head that contains a statement of student interests and a list of suggested
appropriate members. The Associate Head, with the concurrence of the Graduate
Program Committee, will approve or modify the list to ensure depth and balance.
The Candidacy Committee should be established at least 2 months ahead of the
actual examination, so that the student will have adequate time to prepare
propositions and to become acquainted with the members of the committee.
Materials to be Submitted Prior to the Exam: At least one week prior to
exam the following should be submitted to the members and the Graduate Program
Office:
1. A resume containing
information on courses taken or planned, the name of the advisor, title of the
planned thesis, previous degrees, honors, etc.
2. Two propositions whose
defense will form the basis of the exam. Proposals should be acceptable form
before the exam in writing style and length. The roving panel member will
decide in advance whether this is the case and the exam can proceed.
Propositions: Two separate research propositions should be
prepared. Each proposition should be no more than 5 double-spaced pages of
text, exclusive of figures and references. The focus of the proposition should
be an idea or hypothesis that is to be tested by completing a body of research.
Each proposition should contain an introduction, setting the stage for the
formulation of the hypothesis and providing background information, a clear
statement of the hypothesis to be tested, a description of the proposed work to
test the hypothesis, the criteria that would be used to accept and/or reject
the hypothesis, as well as a statement of the significance of the proposed
work. The audience for the research proposals is the candidacy committee.
The first proposition is intended to assess depth
of thinking, as opposed to originality of thinking, which is the focus
of the second proposition. The first
proposition quite properly can concern a proposed thesis topic and can involve
an advisor's ideas and input. It is expected to exhibit reasonable depth in
background and understanding of detail. The advisor’s assessment of the quality
of its preparation can serve as guide for the preparation of the second
proposition.
The second the propositions should represent
entirely original work of the student in concept and in background literature
research. Because the advisor will not originate the ideas behind this proposal
nor materially add to its development, the proposal typically will not concern
a previous term paper, a previous thesis, or the proposed Ph.D. thesis.
The two propositions should address distinctly
different problems and should not be confined to the same narrow sub-discipline
of the geosciences. Both proposals will cover work that would be sufficient for
a PhD thesis. If a student is unclear on the appropriateness of topics, he/she
should consult the Associate Head.
These propositions and the student's defense of them in the examination should demonstrate originality and judgment, as well as geosciences background and abilities in writing, speaking, and reasoning.
Conduct of the Exam: The Candidacy Examination is
chaired by the roving panel member in order to ensure uniformity of procedures,
e.g. the relative time devoted to proposals or to general questions, and the
level of background required. The student should consult with the roving member
if he or she has any questions on exam procedure or philosophy.
The Examination will be oral and about 2.5 hours length. An introductory oral presentation for each proposal is limited to 10 minutes. Committees will normally devote at least half the time to the propositions and ancillary questions. Questions typically asked include:
·
What
is the hypothesis being tested?
·
Will the experimental design lead to valid
tests of the hypotheses?
·
How
would you interpret the following hypothetical results?
·
What
is the significance of your research?
Time should be reserved, however, for "general" questions unrelated to proposals and attention should be given to deficiencies in background.
Evaluation: The primary objective of the evaluation is to
determine whether a student has the preparation, intellectual capacity, and
professional attitude to complete a Ph.D. program successfully. The committee’s
evaluation will be based upon the quality of the submitted propositions, their
oral presentation and defense, as well as the student’s background preparation.
The committee will assess the following and make necessary recommendations:
1. The preparedness of the
student to be a Ph.D candidate. The preparation and defense of the two research
propositions will serve as the primary means of assessing the student's ability
to complete a Ph.D. program.
2.
The student’s command of the necessary background to carry out the
proposed work.
3.
The student’s ability to communicate verbally and in writing.
Outcome of the Exam: At the conclusion of the
examination, the committee will first take a non-binding vote on accepting the
student as a Ph.D. candidate, discuss the student’s performance, and then cast
the binding vote. A majority vote is needed to pass (e.g., 3 of 4 or 3 of 5).
In the event of a tie, the outcome is a failure. Passage or failure of the exam
will be based primarily on whether or not the student has demonstrated the
capacity to complete a PhD program successfully (Evaluation point #1 above).
If the student is accepted as Ph.D. candidate, but
demonstrated deficiencies in background or English competency (Evaluations
points #2 and #3 above), the committee should make recommendations to the
student on how to address these through coursework or reading. In exceptional
circumstances, the committee may recommend the completion of a M.S. thesis
before proceeding to the Ph.D. The committee Chair should send a separate memo
to the Associate Head concerning any restrictions or specifications in the
degree plan, for review by the Graduate Program Committee. In the case of a
recommended M.S. thesis, a student will automatically proceed to Ph.D. research
(with no second Candidacy Examination) upon successful defense of the M.S.
thesis.
If the student is not accepted as Ph.D. candidate
he/she may be advised to repeat the candidacy exam, or counseled to leave the Ph.D.
track.
A doctoral candidate should
prepare a written Thesis Proposal, to be distributed one week before the
presentation. The proposal will be presented orally before the Ph.D. committee.
It must be approved by majority vote of the committee and should be presented
as soon after Candidacy as possible. The comprehensive exam cannot be scheduled
until a thesis proposal has been successfully presented. One copy of the
proposal will reside in the official student file. The proposal should be in
standard format ~5-15 pages of text, abstract, references, and figures. The
Graduate Program will provide examples on file. The purpose of this proposal is
to consolidate a student's thinking about the thesis problem, to define its
limits, and to inform the committee of research initiatives.
The Comprehensive Exam is administered by the Doctoral Committee after the student has essentially completed his/her course work and after a language requirement (if required) and the English competency requirement are fulfilled. This period will normally be the fifth or sixth semester.
The purpose of the
examination is to determine the student's understanding of the chosen field of
specialization ("depth") as well as general knowledge in the
geosciences ("breadth"). A student may consult the Committee Chair
(normally the Advisor) for clarification of the areas in which comprehension is
expected (e.g., paleontology, seismology, igneous petrology, Appalachian
geology, etc.).
The exam will include both
written and oral portions, with the written preceding the oral (and usually
conducted over two days, with a break of one day before the oral examination
for the grading of the exam). The purpose of the written portion is to allow
more reflective and deeper analysis of problems than typically occurs in an
oral exam. For the written portion, the Committee Chair will designate areas
that each committee member should cover and provide guidelines on time
constraints. The question or questions from each committee member should
concern breadth or depth of knowledge. Format of questions may vary
considerably. For example, questions might be open-book or closed-book or might
involve a critique of a journal article. Each member will evaluate his or her
question(s) and combine the result with the result of the oral exam. The entire
written exam will be assembled for and distributed to the committee before the
oral exam and included in the student's file.
Date, time, and place for an
oral examination will be arranged by the Graduate Program Office upon request
by the Chair of the Doctoral Committee in consultation with the student, who
will have checked with other members of the Committee as to suitable times. At
least three weeks before the examination, the Associate Head must request the
Dean of the Graduate School to schedule the examination. A favorable vote of at
least two-thirds of the committee is required for passing. The Committee Chair
will report the result of the examination to the Associate Head and to the
student, and will deliver the signed examination forms to the Associate Head
for transmittal to the Graduate School.
Students
seeking the Ph.D. are placed at the time of their admission into either the
M.S. or Ph.D. program by the Admissions Committee, based upon careful
examination of their academic background, demonstrated abilities, and stated
preferences on bypassing the M.S. If a student is admitted for the M.S. degree,
the degree must be attained before proceeding to the Ph.D. unless a bypass
petition is submitted to the Associate Head. The petition should contain a
record of achievement, a definitive statement of research interests, and
discussion of background preparation. The Associate Head should consult with
the student's advisor and committee, if appropriate, and make a decision to
approve or deny, with the concurrence of the Graduate Program Committee. If the
petition is approved, the Associate Head will initiate a change-of-status
petition with the Graduate School, and a candidacy examination should be
scheduled as soon as practicable.
If a student is admitted for
the Ph.D. degree (bypassing the M.S.), a candidacy examination must be passed
prior to the end of three semesters of residence, as specified by the Graduate
School. Prior to the examination at
least 18 credits must have been earned in graduate courses.
Failure to pass the
examination will terminate the Ph.D. program and financial support. In
exceptional circumstances, a student may petition the Associate Head for an
exception to the three-semester rule. Such petitions have to be approved by the
Graduate Program Committee.
Change
of Status Following the M.S. Degree at Penn State
A student admitted to the
M.S. degree program, having achieved the M.S. degree, may continue for the
Ph.D. degree if the Associate Head, with the concurrence of the Graduate
Program Committee, approves a resume-studies petition filed with the Graduate
School. The Associate Head may require a written statement from the student and
recommendation letters from appropriate faculty. The petition should be filed
after the M.S. thesis/paper defense and after the thesis/paper has been
submitted to the Graduate School/Department. The petition will be signed only
after approval of the thesis/paper by the Graduate School/Associate Head.
Students cannot expect
financial support on a Ph.D. track until a resume-studies petition is approved.
Students filing a
resume-studies petition for Ph.D. study must pass a candidacy examination in
the semester following that in which the petition takes effect i.e.,
before the end of the second full semester of Ph.D.-track study. Failure to
pass the examination will terminate the Ph.D. program and financial support.
Students who continue into
the Ph.D. program after completion of an M.S. degree in Geosciences at Penn
State are subject to the time-of-support conditions indicated earlier in the
'Blue Book.' That is, all semesters of student support received during the M.S.
program are counted against the total departmental support available during a
Ph.D. program.
Students Admitted to Penn State with the M.S. Degree
It is expected that students
admitted to Penn State with the M.S. will have the degree in hand upon arrival.
Students will have been so informed in the admissions letter. In exceptional
circumstances, and upon petition to the Associate Head, incidental degree
requirements can be completed during the first semester in residence. In that
instance, the M.S. institution must certify that degree requirements have been
completed before a second semester's financial support can be approved.
Students admitted to Penn
State with the M.S. Degree (or with the M.S. Degree requirements substantially
completed; see above) must pass a Candidacy Examination during the second
semester of residence. Failure to pass the examination will terminate the Ph.D.
program and financial support. In exceptional circumstances, a student may
petition the Associate Head for an exception to the two-semester rule. Such
petitions would have to be approved by the Graduate Program Committee and the
Associate Head.