The purpose of the examination is to establish that a student is qualified to undertake the thesis research required for the Ph.D. degree. The exam determines whether the student can formulate a productive approach to an interesting scientific problem that is based on an in-depth understanding of the scientific literature in that field, in the form of a coherent research proposal. Although the exam can be based on any topic, most address a proposed thesis project. The qualifying exam proposal defines an important problem, critically reviews the relevant literature, devises a hypothesis-based or, where appropriate, discovery-based research plan by which to address that problem in a logical and direct manner, and explains how the data from such a study might be interpreted. The proposal is then defended in an oral examination before an ad hoc committee. Students pass, conditionally pass and are assigned a remedial exercise or are asked to repeat all or part of the examination, or fail (see further details below).

Timing:
The student is expected to pass this examination in the spring or early summer of their second year in the graduate program, and prior to assembly of a thesis committee and formal initiation of thesis research.

Format:
The Qualifying Examination is in two parts: a written research proposal and an oral defense of that proposal before an examining committee.

Examining Committee: The committee consists of four faculty members including the student's proposed thesis sponsor. Members of the committee may come from outside the training program when appropriate.  The Qualifying Exam Committee can remain as the student's Thesis Committee.

Initiation of the Examination Process:
At least eight weeks in advance of the date desired by the student for the oral defense of the proposal, the student should prepare a 1-2 page synopsis of the project. It should include a brief rationale, a set of aims, and a description of the experimental (or other) approach. After approval by the thesis advisor, the proposal is submitted to one of the co-directors of the Training Program. The director approves the ad hoc Examining Committee composition. The student will then provide the synopsis to the Committee members, and upon agreement to serve on the Committee, the student will schedule a mutually agreeable date for the exam. These steps should be taken at least six weeks prior to the expected examination date. During preparation of the proposal, the student may have general discussions with the mentor or other relevant colleagues, but the final full-length version should be written independently. The finished proposal should be presented to members of the examining committee at least one week before the oral exam.

To better track this important milestone, students must inform the Program administrators of the proposed date of the qualifying exam and composition of the committee as soon as these are known, and must return  the signed report to the administrators after the exam. 

Research Proposal:

1. Subject: The research proposal may be in any area deemed appropriate by the thesis advisor and program directors, including, but not restricted to, the student's dissertation topic.
 
2. Copies and Submission: student must complete and submit a copy of the written proposal to each of the examining committee members and the thesis advisor.
 
3. Length: The written proposal should consist of 10 - 20 double- spaced typewritten pages plus additional pages of references.
 
4. Format:
1. Title
2. Specific Aims (one page): State concisely what the proposed research is intended to accomplish and/or what hypothesis is to be tested. List the questions as aims (2-3), and briefly state how you will address each.
3. Background and Significance (3-5 pages): Describe the present state of the field, critically evaluate existing knowledge, and specifically identify the gaps that the project is intended to fill. State the importance of the research by relating the specific aims to long-term objectives.
4. Rationale (one page maximum): Develop the connections between the specific aims and the background; describe the general experimental or other approaches proposed; and show why they are justified in relation to the background.
5. Research Plan (4-10 pages): For each aim (in the order listed in iv):
1. Discuss the experimental or other procedures. Describe any new methodology and its advantage over existing methodologies.
2. Describe the means by which the data will be analyzed and interpreted.
3. Give the possible results, both positive and negative, and an interpretation of different outcomes.
4. Discuss the potential difficulties and limitations of the proposed procedures and alternative approaches that might be taken to achieve the aims.
 
 
6. Future work (one paragraph): Indicate briefly further directions of the research, and the anticipated impact on the field.
7. References (should not exceed fifty): Each complete literature citation must include the names of all authors, the name of the book or journal, volume number, page numbers, and year of publication. Providing titles is useful but optional.

Oral Defense:
At the oral defense of the written proposal the student will deliver a short (15-20 minute) presentation. Questions by the Examining Committee may focus initially on the proposal itself but can lead to questions on any area of neuroscience, and, depending on the student's orientation, on other areas of contemporary science. This qualifying examination is comprehensive, and the student is therefore required to demonstrate an appropriately broad background in neuroscience and an understanding of underlying principles.

Outcome:
The Examining Committee may pass the student; pass the student conditional on successful completion of remedial procedures to fill in apparent shortcomings (such as taking a course, remedial reading in a tutorial session, or successful completion of an additional written project); request a second examination to consist of an oral defense of the original proposal, of an amended proposal or of a new proposal; or fail the student. Should a student fail the initial or the re-examination, the matter will be referred to the Executive Committee of the Program whose members will determine whether or not the student is to continue in the doctoral program.