Qualifying Exam

Qualifying Exam Committee Roster (updated 12/13/2023) – List of faculty students have had on their QE committee.

Qualifying Exam Application (to be submitted via the student portal) – Application to be submitted 3 months prior to exam date.

Please use the Room Reservation Survey if you'd like the program to book you a room for your qualifying exam or exam practice.

DSCB QE Checklist

The examination process and expectations for student performance
The qualifying examination is designed to test the student’s ability to conceive, design and execute an original investigation to address an important biomedical problem. This is done in the context of the thesis project in the form of a written proposal followed by an oral defense and examination. The Qualifying Examination Committee, consisting of four faculty members chosen by the student, evaluates both components.

Written Proposal: The written proposal should marshal the relevant literature to explain why the research questions and the hypotheses being addressed are novel and important. The proposal should be organized around an overall objective/hypothesis and multiple specific aims. Inclusion of exploratory/discovery efforts in the proposal is acceptable, but the proposal should contain some hypothesis-testing elements. The proposal is not a "contract" for what the student intends to do for the thesis work and therefore need not include everything the student is thinking about doing. Rather, the student should strive for a well-constructed proposal in which the specific aims are logically connected, address related issues, and represent a logical approach to the scientific problem. Typically this would be a subset of what the student is doing in the lab and/or planning to do. Preliminary data obtained by the student need not be sufficient to demonstrate feasibility of the proposed experiments, but the student be asked to explain why the experiments are expected to be feasible. The proposal should make it clear what will be learned from the proposed experiments based on possible outcomes and thoughtful consideration should be given to potential caveats and alternative strategies.

In crafting the proposal, the student should work closely with the Chair of the Qualifying Exam Committee, and as appropriate, other individual faculty members on their committee to produce a nearly finalized draft 2 weeks prior to the exam, which is then disseminated to the rest of the Exam Committee. Timely adherence to this deadline is essential. It is recommended that the student meet individually with committee members after submission of the nearly finalized draft of the written proposal to get their feedback. Students should understand that faculty review of their proposals and pre-exam meetings do not guarantee passing the exam. The purpose of the advance input is to ensure that the proposals are not grossly deficient or structurally unsound. At the discretion of the Chair, additional modifications of the proposal to take into account comments of the other committee members may be requested up until 7 days before the exam.

Oral Exam: During the oral exam, the student should be able to defend the logic of the experiments and their interpretations, as well as identify and discuss their limitations and how such limitations might be minimized. The student should prepare a brief introductory oral presentation approximately 15 minutes in length; the precise logistics (PowerPoint slides versus ‘chalk talk’) and format of the overall exam should be pre-arranged with the Chair of Qualifying Exam Committee. The student is expected to demonstrate an in-depth understanding of the relevant background literature and be able to discuss how the proposed studies will advance the field. In addition, during the examination the student may be tested on the student’s general knowledge related to the proposal and more broadly, for example related to material that in presented in the DSCB coursework. In general, a greater depth of knowledge is expected in areas closer to the proposal but some degree of general knowledge is also expected.

Structure of the oral exam

  • The examination should be scheduled for 2 hours
  • After everyone is assembled in the room, the student will be asked to leave and the Chair of the committee will lead a discussion with the other faculty members about:
    • The student’s performance in the program (grades, rotation evaluations, journal clubs, etc.) and written feedback to the committee provided by the student’s dissertation advisor.
    • Their experience with the student during the process of putting the written proposal together. (Students should recognize that the QE exam starts on the day they meet with their first committee member, NOT on the day of their oral exam!)
    • Concerns they have with the proposal and any particular points they want to be sure to ask about during the exam.
  • The student will be invited back in and asked to give a 10-15 minute overview of the proposal. Usually, faculty do not ask questions during this period, but this is at the discretion of the QE Committee Chair. It is helpful for the student to discuss the preferred format with the QE chair ahead of time.
  • After the introduction by the student, the committee will ask the student questions on topics such as: 
    • The background and rationale for the project (including relevant published literature)
    • The interpretation of published or preliminary data relevant to the project
    • The methods that will be used, including topics such as how the experiments will be performed, what the expected outcomes will be, how those outcomes will be interpreted, what caveats should be considered, controls that should be performed, etc.
    • What approach(es) could be taken to answer a question devised by a committee member
    • The broader implications of the project and how it fits into other work in the field
  • Once the question and answer period is completed, the student will be asked to leave the room again and the committee will discuss the outcome of the exam.  When a consensus is reached, the student will be invited back into the room and the committee will inform the student of the outcome and provide additional feedback. The QE Chair will submit this feedback to the DSCB office in writing on the “Qualifying Examination Report” form.

Food/Beverage Policy for Meetings:  Students in the DSCB program are not allowed to provide food and/or beverages at any qualifying exam or thesis committee meeting.  Providing food/beverages creates an unnecessary financial burden on our students and distracts them from the actual purpose of the meeting.

Pre-requisites to take the qualifying exam
All core coursework must be complete before the student can take the exam. This includes the student’s elective coursework. This requirement can be fulfilled by taking one full-length course or two mini-courses in addition to those the student took in the spring quarter of the student’s first year. The one exception is BMS 214: Ethics and Responsible Conduct of Research. You are not required to complete this course before you take the exam.

When to take qualifying exams
Qualifying exams may be taken after the student has joined a dissertation lab and been working there for about a year. The expectation is that the exam will be taken by April 1. Exceptions may be granted on a case by case basis; please contact the DSCB office. The timing and topic of this exam are of the student’s choice, with the advice and consent of the student’s thesis advisor.

MSTP Students: MSTPs may take the exam after working in the dissertation lab for one year, and may therefore take the exam earlier than the PhD students and are encouraged to do so. However, the final deadline is April 1 of the second year of PhD study.

Administrative Responsibilities
At least 3 months in advance of the examination students must officially submit the Qualifying Exam application, which lists the faculty serving as the examining committee as well as the subject areas, with the Graduate Division. This information is required by the UCSF Graduate Division. The application can be found on the student portal.

This form must be approved online by the student’s thesis advisor, or PI. The application form must include the names of the student’s committee members. This is critical, as it generates some necessary paperwork to the student’s committee chair, without which the student cannot Advance to Candidacy, and ultimately, graduate. (Not to alarm the student, just be sure to return the form to us in plenty of time.)

In addition, the student must notify the program coordinator the date, time, and location of the exam (e.g., Parnassus or Mission Bay). We can book a room for the student’s exam, provide any necessary equipment (such as an LCD projector), and will provide a copy of the student’s academic file to the student’s chair. Advance notice of the student’s exam is necessary to ensure we are able to book the room and route the paperwork to the appropriate individuals.

Process for Selecting Committee Members

  • The DSCB selection committee will select one, core faculty member to serve on the QE committee and request their participation by December 1. Once participation is confirmed, program coordinator will inform the student of committee selection.
  • Students select the three remaining members of their QE committee and email this information to the program coordinator by January 1.  Program leadership will approval the final list.
  • Students will contact faculty to finalize the committee membership and decide which of the four members will be chair.  
  • Students must submit the date and time of their exam to the program coordinator no later than 3 months prior to the exam.

Timeline 

  • An informational meeting is held for all 2nd years each October.
  • The Qualifying Exam Committee should be assembled 3 months before the exam date, the QE application should be filed with Graduate Division and approved by the student's PI, and the exam should be scheduled and confirmed with program manager
  • A complete draft of the Specific Aims page should be submitted to the QE Committee Chair at least 2 months before the exam date
  • The student should have met with each of the QE Committee members at least once and gotten approval for a final version of the Specific Aims page at least 1 months before the exam date.
  • A final draft of the full written proposal is due to the committee no later than 2 weeks before the exam date. Because revisions are sometimes necessary, it is strongly advised that a complete draft be submitted to the QE Committee Chair at least one month before the exam date.  Submitting a final draft to the full committee more than 2 weeks before the exam date is also recommended.

Composition of the exam committee
The qualifying exam committee must include four faculty members, two of whom must be members of the DSCB program. The chair should be someone who is knowledgeable in the area of the primary proposal, and must have a UCSF faculty appointment (not clinical or adjunct). The student’s thesis advisor can help the student select the committee membership and must approve it. Typically, the student decides who they want to be the chair of their committee and asks this person if they would be willing to serve in this role.  The Committee Chair will have the additional responsibilities of ensuring that the student understands the exam process and that the exam process proceeds according to program standards; helping the student resolve conflicting feedback, if any, from other committee members; giving the student additional feedback during the preparation of the oral and written components; and presenting the student to the committee, as described below.  The Chair is also responsible for completing the Qualifying Examination Report form and returning it to the DSCB office.

Some points to remember when choosing the student’s qualifying exam committee chair.

  • The student’s thesis advisor may not serve on the examination committee.
  • The chair of the qualifying exam and the student’s eventual thesis committee chair can be the same person (updated 2023).
  • The student’s thesis advisor may not be named as the chair of your dissertation committee, although he or she will be a member of the dissertation committee.

Developing a research proposal
The student’s proposal should be written in the form of a NIH postdoctoral fellowship application and include the Specific Aims, Research Strategy, and References sections, other sections can be omitted (guidelines, including formatting can be downloaded at the NIH website). Please note that the 1 + 6 page limit for the Specific Aims and Research Strategy sections will be enforced. The Research Strategy section includes any of your data that you want to include in the proposal, but references are not included in this page count.

Sample Proposals
Please contact Meredith for a sample proposal. Samples are to be used for DSCB student qualifying exam preparation and review purposes only, and must remain confidential. Please do not share them.

Examination outcomes
There are typically three different outcomes:

  1. Pass: the committee unanimously agrees that the student has passed the exam. No further examination or revision is required, and the student is immediately eligible to advance to PhD candidacy.
  2. Conditional Pass: the committee votes to require additional work from the student to pass the exam. This may include (for example) revising all or part of the written proposal, preparing additional material, meeting with the committee individually to review sections of the exam or proposal, etc. Once this work is completed, the committee will review and vote a second time on the exam outcome. This must be completed in a satisfactory fashion within a time period specified by the committee that is not to exceed 6 months.
  3. Fail: the committee determines that the quality of the written and/or oral sections of the exam is sufficiently lacking that a Pass cannot be awarded. In this case, the committee must vote to either 1) allow the student to re-take the exam (which may require re-writing the written proposal and/or re-taking the oral section), or 2) that the student will not be permitted to re-take the exam. In the case of option 1, only one additional attempt will be permitted. A second failure will result in dismissal from the DSCB program and UCSF. In the case of option 2, the result will be immediate dismissal from the DSCB program and UCSF. For both options, the option of taking a separate comprehensive exam or preparing a master’s thesis as a path to receive a master’s degree may be considered.