Appendix 2. The Role of Thesis Advisers in Preparation of the Oral Component of the Comprehensive Examination

It has become apparent that faculty advisers have had widely differing degrees of involvement with their Ph.D. students during the preparation of research proposals, and especially during the preparation for the defense of the research proposal. Such a situation is completely unfair to the student body and has arisen because some faculty members consider the examination primarily a learning experience while others consider it an important criterion for judging the ability of students to deal with the real world of research.

This problem was discussed at a general faculty meeting in December 1988. A consensus was reached that the faculty member may provide limited assistance to the student in preparing the abstract or the proposal; however, (s)he may not prepare the student for the examination, though (s)he should provide the student with general guidelines. For example, it is desirable that the thesis advisers should tell the student to be prepared to defend the use of any technique proposed and be able to explain both the practical and theoretical basis of the technique and the technique's potential limitations. On the other hand, it is completely unacceptable to tell the student that the proposed technique is not good and to suggest a different one.

It is not acceptable for a faculty member to participate in a practice examination. Instead, students should be encouraged to give presentations of their proposition to groups of other graduate students who can then advise on matters of presentation and provide practice in an oral defense.

Faculty advisers could help the students considerably by discussing the preparation of a research proposal in general terms. It is acceptable to show a student a copy of a grant proposal, for example, and to explain the reasons for the way the different sections are written; it could be very helpful to the student to see referees' comments as well.

Students are encouraged to get information from other faculty members, postdocs, and students concerning any aspect of the proposed research. Examples are leads into the literature, techniques that may or may not be published, new information from "the grapevine," etc. Both students and faculty members should be concerned about the need to ensure that the concept of the proposal and its basic strategy are the work of the student. (This is a difficult area and when questions arise it is important to consult with a member of the Curriculum Committee. This consultation will help ensure that similar standards are applied across the Program.) Example: A student proposes a procedure that the faculty member recognizes as okay in principle, but impractical or terribly out-of-date (inefficient).

It is reasonable to question the method, suggesting further reading, which will enable the student to learn why the method is not good one. The key element is that the faculty member, in so far as possible, should help the student find the way to prepare a proposal and not give them such direct advice as to share in the development of the idea.

Often, a faculty member can help a student avoid a pitfall by asking, "Have you considered other ways to analyze for the phenomenon—ways that might be more direct (less time-consuming, cheaper)?"

Other questions that often need to be asked include, "Isn't this experiment already implied in the previous papers? Won't those authors certainly be doing this work?" Or, "Is this problem anywhere near the mainstream of research? Will the results be worth the time?"

When a student asks his/her adviser questions that might violate the guidelines, it is appropriate for the adviser to refer the student to a member of the Curriculum Committee. This will preclude any problems involving conflict of interest.

In contrast to the oral comprehensive examination, the preparation of posters and talks on their rotation projects by firstyear students is an area where faculty input is decidedly appropriate. This is a situation in which students can learn a great deal from their advisers.