Graduate Training Program
How To Prepare, and Prepare for
Your Qualifying Exam
A. General Procedures:
• taken by the end of 2nd year, certainly
by October of 3rd year
• choose the right committee members
• be sure you meet with your committee
members often before the exam to have
approval of specific topic area AND
general outline of Specific Aims
• read, read, read ---- and then read some
more
B. Purpose of the Exam:
• “…whether the student is qualified and competent
to continue research on a specific project leading
toward the PhD”
• potential for independent thought
• comprehension of generalities and specifics of the
research area (and everything related to that area)
• ability to identify a critical (and significant) problem,
and then critically and logically approach the
problem (i.e. What are the knowledge gaps and
critical questions to be addressed?, What are the
critical experiments to answer the questions?)
• committee to advise on the path for the project - as
such, the exam itself should be viewed as, in part,
a learning experience
C. About the Project:
• should address a significant issue, yielding
publishable results
• a good and innovative idea
• linkage to the particular discipline (e.g.
immunology, genetics, toxicology, etc)
and human health
• have a clearly focused and mechanistic
hypothesis (i.e. not descriptive)
D. Common Problems:
• overly ambitious
• lack of significance and/or some linkage to human
health (I.e. don’t let a committee member say “So
what?”)
• lack of a focused hypothesis --- and in some cases ANY
hypothesis
• lack of focused aims that will test the hypothesis
• lack of a logical research plan
• questionable reasoning in approach
• using approaches that will only test the hypothesis
indirectly, or will not give you the data you need
• poor writing that is not thorough and detailed
• lacking good scientific method/approaches
• did not read, read, read…..
E. Keys to Success:
• know the research area -- read, read, read
• get help from each of your committee members - have
each committee member approve the general outline of
your proposal
• write clearly, to the point, but be detailed and thorough
• engender enthusiasm in your reader (i.e. committee)
• clearly indicate what is novel and important
• be logical, scientific, and specific - don’t use jargon
• don’t over-interpret - realize the limitations of each
experiment, and alternate approaches
• use accepted (state-of-art / novel) and optimized
scientific methods / approaches
• discuss your hypothesis/hypotheses with other
colleagues
E. The Written Proposal:
• ariel, 11 font, 1 inch margins
E.1. Abstract: summary of the proposed project
• be sure states the critical issue(s) to be tested, why
important, the central hypothesis, and general
approaches to be used
• Briefly answer
- What to do?
- Why do this?
- How do this?
- Evidence when done? (expected results)
- Why anyone cares?
E. The Written Proposal:
E.2. Specific Aims: (1 page)
• state long-range goal of the research
• identify critical knowledge gaps and why important
to address these - What will be the expected
scientific impact of the work?
• statement of central hypothesis
• listing of 2-4 specific aims:
• for EACH aim state concisely and realistically the
hypothesis to be tested, and the rationale
• for EACH aim briefly (1 sentence) state what the
Aim will accomplish
• NOTE: This is probably the most important part of
the written exam. It sets the tone for the rest and
gives a logic to follow in the remainder of the
document.
E. The Written Proposal:
E.3. Background and Significance (3 pages):
• logical development of background relevant to the
problem, global to more specific.
• state concisely what is known (Hint: A positive
statement about knowledge as the beginning
of a paragraph. This is a “take home” message.)
• identify critical knowledge gaps and needs, and
why it is important to fill these
• relate these needs to the specific hypothesis you
are testing
• relate these needs and your hypothesis to some
public health benefit
• Innovation: clearly state what is innovative
E. The Written Proposal:
E.4. Preliminary Studies:
• students not expected to have a large amount of
data
• the data shown should demonstrate the problem
and/or the feasibility of the research
• only show the most important and relevant data;
simple graphs/tables with precise legends
(Hint: Give a positive statement as the title of
the graph/table)
• most faculty like the graphs/tables incorporated
into the text (but can include at end of section;
but don’t exceed page limits)
• contributions of others specifically stated
E. The Written Proposal:
E.5. Experimental Design & Methods (10 pages):
• discuss in detail the experimental design and
procedures to be used to accomplish Specific
Aims
• this should be in a logical progression, give
tentative time-table
• describe new methods and advantages over older
methods
• describe expected data, limitations of interpretation,
and alternative approaches (recognize that an
experiment could have more than one possible
outcome, as well as interpretation)
E. The Written Proposal:
E.5. Experimental Design & Methods (cont.):
• Developing rationale for approaches, a logical flow
of experiments, and critical interpretation are more
important than some details (i.e. buffers, etc). But
you need to KNOW details, and be able to justify
details such as choice of cell line, pH,
concentrations of agents, times of analysis. YOU
MUST KNOW THE THEORETICAL BASIS FOR EACH
METHOD AND APPROACH USED.
• Hint: sub-sections for 1) Rational & Hypothesis, 2)
Strategy, 3) Experimental, 4) Expected Results
Possible Difficulties, Alternate Approaches for each
Aim.
• Indicate how data will be analyzed (i.e. statistics,
and Power calculation to be sure have enough N)
E. The Written Proposal:
E.6. Bibliography:
• names of all authors, title, book or journal, volume
number, inclusive page numbers, year of
publication.
E. After You Finish Writing:
• Have someone else read the proposal before
submitting to your mentor.
• Have your mentor read the proposal WELL before you
submit to the Dean’s office and rest of your committee.
• Don’t ignore the feedback you are given.
• You must submit the proposal to your committee at
least 2 weeks before the exam date.
F. Preparation for the Actual Exam Day:
• KNOW EVERYTHING there is to know about your area
area of research
• Anything you learned in classes is also free game for
questions - BUT the committee will likely only go after
these if related to your research area, and knowledge
of this is important for your experimental design
and/or interpretation of data.
• Get a good nights sleep, relax, and have fun -- really.
G. The Day of the Exam:
• exam lasts 2-3 hours (but be prepared for 4-5)
• judged on
- written presentation of proposal
- ability to critically evaluate a research area, propose
a relevant hypothesis, and design critical
experiments
- grasp of fundamental issues and theoretical basis
for experimental approaches
- logic of experimental design & scientific method
- how to critically interpret data (don’t over-interpret)
- knowledge of alternate approaches
• be ready to listen, learn, and share knowledge
G. The Day of the Exam (cont.):
• If you don’t understand the question, ask to repeat
• If you don’t know the answer, logically think about how
to get the answer, I.e. “I don’t recall the specific details
or I don’t recall if anyone has ever examined that - but
these are the types of studies I would do to address
that issue.” Don’t BS -- the committee will know and
the hole that is being dug will get deeper.
• If you have some knowledge that may be contrary to
what a committee member indicates, don’t be afraid
to respectfully indicate that -- the committee member
may not know the research area as well as you do.
• Be confident (not flippant or impudent). Realize that
knowledge gives confidence (i.e. read, read, read). If
you are not confident, the committee will know. Don’t
be intimidated…
H. After the Exam:
• If you have followed ALL of the directions in this
presentation – then CELEBRATE : ) (at least for a
couple of hours – then get back to work)
• realize that you still have to
- do all of the studies that you indicated
- change experimental plans as necessary;
sometimes these should change
- consult often with your committee
- write manuscripts
- prepare your thesis and take the final Defense
(which is not a given for a “PASS”)
• if you have not followed the directions in this
presentation – seriously consider the options…