Candidacy Examination

• In the fourth quarter of full-time study, the student writes two abstracts proposing a research project that is within the realm of expertise of his/her dissertation advisor. Each should have substantive potential to become a grant and the student’s dissertation. Although the topic of the grant proposal should be within the realm of the dissertation adviser's area of expertise, a topic is not acceptable if it overlaps extensively with existing written research proposals.
• The student’s dissertation advisory committee selects the concept deemed most appropriate for writing a grant.
• The student, with the adviser’s guidance, identifies an appropriate agency and grant program for writing a grant that would potentially fund his/her study (dissertation).  The format of the grant proposal follows the published guidelines of the selected agency, but does not need to have a budget.
• In cases where the grant format for the most appropriate funding agency does not allow space for a proposal substantive enough to demonstrate the student's understanding of the proposed research project, the student’s dissertation advisory committee may require a more substantive proposal up to but not exceeding what would be required for a grant application to NIH.
• Once the format for the proposal is agreed to, the advisory committee establishes a timeline for completion of the grant proposal. At this point, the student begins writing the proposal.  Faculty guidance should be general at this stage.  It is appropriate for the student to seek mentoring and guidance to ensure they are on the right track and are employing appropriate resources in preparation of the grant.  It is also appropriate for faculty, when asked, to identify weak, missing, or difficult to read sections of the proposal.  However, detailed editing from the faculty as might be done to help the student submit a manuscript is not appropriate for the proposal.  The intellectual content of the proposal must represent the student’s own thinking.
• The final grant proposal is evaluated as the student’s written candidacy examination. If the written examination is judged acceptable, an Oral Examination is scheduled and held in no less than two weeks.
• The committee that conducts the Oral Candidacy Examination consists of at least five faculty members including the Advisory Committee and a representative of the Graduate School.
• Students who pass the written and oral candidacy examination are expected to submit the grant proposal and would subsequently develop a full proposal for the dissertation. At this stage, input from the dissertation committee and the student's adviser would be integrated into the proposal with detailed input from the adviser in order to ensure the maximum likelihood of success in funding of the proposal.
• The final form of dissertation proposal must be approved by the student’s committee prior to initiating his/her dissertation research.  In research, it is not uncommon for substantial changes in the scope of a project to become necessary if unanticipated difficulties arise during the project.  There is no point in continuing a dissertation project that cannot address the question.  If the student and their adviser determine the need to substantially change the scope of the project during it's execution, they must present the new plan and obtain approval from the dissertation committee.  In no case should the dissertation committee find to their surprise that the final dissertation bears little resemblance to the dissertation proposal. 

Proposed Timeline for the Candidacy Examination (assuming full-time student)

Year 2: Autumn quarter

Year 2: Winter quarter

Year 2: Spring quarter