Ph.D. Qualifying Exam

Objectives of the Ph.D. Qualifying Exam

The Qualifying Examination (QE) in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (MSEN) is intended to test the Candidate’s intellectual maturity and fundamental knowledge and understanding of materials science and engineering.

The QE will indicate the Candidate’s ability to continue the Ph.D. dissertation work and conduct research independently in a chosen field of study. A critical component of the examination is evaluating the capability for critical and creative thinking, summarizing and critically assessing a large body of literature, and proposing cutting-edge research to address knowledge gaps related to the selected topic.

General Requirements for Ph.D. Qualifying Exam

All MSEN students pursuing a Ph.D. degree, with or without a prior M.S. degree, must pass the QE to be eligible to continue their Ph.D. work. Students should take QE for the first time after completing the third semester (including summer), also known as the first year of study in the MSEN Ph.D. program (example below).

• Entry Fall: ([1] Fall, [2] Spring, [3] Summer)— QE Exam held in the Fall of the second year
• Entry Spring: ([1] Spring, [2] Summer, [3] Fall)— QE Exam held Spring of second year

The qualifying exam is offered only during the Fall and Spring semesters. A minimum of three of the following courses must be completed (and/or waived by having an undergraduate or master’s degree in Materials Science & Engineering) before the exam dates: MSEN 601, MSEN 602, MSEN 603, MSEN 620, and/or MSEN 640.

Candidates on academic probation for overall and/or degree plan GPA at the end of the semester, before taking the exam, are NOT eligible to take the QE. Candidates on academic probation for term GPA, Annual Evaluation, and unsatisfactory progress ARE eligible to take QE.

A Candidate who does NOT complete the QE immediately after the 6th semester (including summer), also known as the second year of study, will be put on academic probation for unsatisfactory degree completion progress regardless of postponement type, and candidates with two postponements forfeit a second attempt at the QE.

• Approved Postponements: to qualify for an approved postponement, it must be a documented university excused absence as stated in the University Student Rules (#7 Attendance).
• Unapproved Postponements: due to ineligibility for coursework, probation, and undocumented

Such cases can be reviewed on an individual basis by the QE Chair (Dr. Kelvin Xie), QE Coordinator (Ms. Kasey Gomez), Graduate Program Director (Dr. Ankit Srivastava), and Graduate Advisor (Ms. Erin Bandza). Candidates should submit postponement requests with their QE application, where possible, and only when they are not emergency-related.

Format of the Ph.D. Qualifying Exam

The MSEN qualifying exam has two components:

• Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Paper— a written focused literature review with critical analysis of a specific topic not directly connected to the Candidate’s Ph.D. thesis topic (for more details, see Section 9.1);
• Oral Ph.D. Qualifying Exam— consisting of a presentation and defense of the Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Report (for more details, see Section 10). Candidates must demonstrate basic knowledge of fundamental materials science and engineering concepts related to the written report.

The QE Committee evaluates both components appointed for each Candidate. (See Section 6 for more details).

Timelines of Ph.D. Qualifying Exams

The important dates for the Ph.D. QE is summarized in Table 1.

Refer to the detailed timeline for the specific semester for dates and deadlines.  Note that most due dates include a submission BEFORE noon.  Documents submitted at noon or later will not be considered; where appropriate, late documents may result in automatic failure (see the specific semester’s detailed timeline). 

Table 1: Qualifying Exam Timeline (Important dates)

Refer to the detailed timeline for the specific semester for dates and deadlines. Note that most due dates include a submission BEFORE noon. Documents submitted at noon or later will not be considered; where appropriate, late documents may result in automatic failure (see the specific semester’s detailed timeline).

Please note that failure to meet deadlines (i.e., QE application, topic selection, and report submission) AND incomplete submissions will result in an automatic fail for QE !!! 

Request for Qualifying Exam

The MSEN Graduate Program Office will notify students who must take the QE in the next QE cycle before that QE cycle starts. Those students must provide the MSEN Graduate Program Office with an electronic version of the completed application form by the deadline in Table 1. The application includes the following: the name of the Candidate, the name of the Candidate’s faculty advisor (if applicable), degrees received, unofficial transcript, degree plan (if submitted and approved), current dissertation topic, and an abstract of current dissertation research. Candidates who have earned a Master of Science degree must also provide an abstract of their MS thesis. Abstracts should be between 300 words and 500 words in length. The QE Committee members use this information to suggest two to three topics for the written portion of the qualifying exam. (See Section 9 for more details.)

If a candidate does not have a faculty advisor or has not begun dissertation research, that Candidate should provide a general synopsis, between 300 words and 500 words, of any past and anticipated research areas.

A candidate who requires special accommodations must provide a recommendation letter from Disability Services with their QE application. The QE Director and Graduate Advisor will work together to meet special accommodation requirements.

Qualifying Exam Informational

At the beginning of each QE cycle (see Table 1), all QE Candidates must attend the informational session provided by the QE Director and Graduate Advisor. This session will explain the MSEN Ph.D. qualifying exam procedures and answer questions.

Qualifying Exam (QE) Committee

The QE Committee consists of three MSEN faculty members assigned to each QE candidate by the QE Director no later than the date in Table 1 for that cycle. Each committee will have a Chair responsible for ensuring the integrity of the exam, that all components of the exam are completed, and that a notification of results is sent by email.

The QE committee may include any combination of Full, Joint, or Affiliated Faculty. However, the QE Chair will strive to balance the committee and ensure that at least one full-time or joint faculty member is represented on each committee. The Candidate’s faculty advisor(s) CANNOT be a member of the QE Committee. The advisor also cannot attend the oral exam or interfere with the examination process in any manner.

During the course of scheduling the date and time of the oral QE component (see Section 9), each Committee member will stipulate whether he or she will attend the exam in person or remotely by videotelephony software such as Zoom. Once the option for in-person or remote participation is chosen, the QE Committee member is expected to abide by that choice. In the event that a QE Committee member must switch from in- person to remote or from remote to in-person, that QE Committee member must either (1) notify the Candidate and the QE Committee Chair by email of the change at least 24 hours before the oral exam, or (2) find an eligible substitute to serve on that QE Committee in the same mode of attendance as originally stipulated. An eligible substitute must have an affiliation with the MSEN Department and must not have any of the conflicts of interest already described.

The MSEN Graduate Program Office will send the QE application to each member of the QE committee and the Candidate.

Scheduling the Qualifying Exam Date

Once the Candidate’s QE committee has been assigned, the QE candidate and the committee members will be notified. At that point, the Candidate must communicate with the QE committee members to schedule the date and time for the examination. The examination must be held at any time between the allotted examination window (typically the first four weeks of the term) (see Table 1) and be scheduled for a duration of two hours.

Necessary: The QE candidate must take the initiative immediately to schedule the two-hour exam date, time, and location (Zoom, Hybrid, or In-Person) once the committee assignments are made. Faculty calendars are busy and can fill up weeks or months in advance, so the QE candidate must proactively schedule the exam. Any Candidate failing to schedule an exam date will forfeit the opportunity to take the exam that semester and receive an automatic FAIL.

If, after multiple attempts to schedule the exam date, the Candidate is still unable to find a date agreeable to all committee members, they may request assistance by emailing the QE Director and the MSEN Graduate Program Office. However, any request for scheduling assistance must be accompanied by documentation of the sustained, proactive efforts made by the Candidate up to that point. A request for assistance may be denied if insufficient documentation is provided. Otherwise, the QE Director and the MSEN Graduate Program Office should not be included in the communications requesting faculty availability and determining the date, time, and location (Zoom, Hybrid, or In-Person).

When the exam date, time, and location are agreed upon by the Candidate and all three QE committee members, the QE candidate must send a calendar invitation for the exam. The invitation must be sent to all three committee members, the MSEN Graduate Program Office, and the QE Director (Dr. Xie). The calendar invitation must be received at least six weeks before the exam date (see Table 1).

Resources for Scheduling

Send Conference Room Requests to msen-front-office@tamu.edu Instructions & Examples for Reserving a Conference Room in RDMC:

Subject: QE Exam Room Request – Erin Bandza

Howdy, MSEN Front Office

Please see my Conference Room Reservation request below.

Name: Erin Bandza UIN: 111002023
Email: msen-advising@tamu.edu Attendees: 4
Purpose: Qualifying Exam Date: 1/20/2023 (Friday)
Time: 10 AM – Noon (2hr Exam)


Other Conference room options:

Mechanical Engineering Office Building (MEOB) Conference Rooms
Chemistry Building Room Reservations
Zachry Engineering Education Complex

Topic of the Qualifying Exam – Selection Process

Members of the QE Committee for each QE Candidate suggest at least two and no more than three QE topics with a short (100-200 words) description of each topic. Topics must be outside the Candidate’s dissertation topic but complement doctoral coursework and the general area of research. Each committee member must suggest one topic and cannot merely “agree” with a topic suggested by another committee member.

The QE Director will work with the Candidate’s committee to collect and store the exam topic choices. Those topic choices will be provided by email to the QE Candidate four weeks before the exam date. (see Table 1). The notification email will be sent to the Candidate, the committee members, and the MSEN Graduate Program Office.

Within seven (7) days after the topic choices are emailed (see Table 1), the Candidate must select one of those topics and notify the same distribution list of that choice using “Reply All” to the original notification of topic choices. If no topic selection is received from the Candidate within seven (7) days of the original notification of topic choices, that Candidate will forfeit the opportunity to take the exam that semester and will receive an automatic FAIL. In addition, once the topic has been chosen, the Candidate cannot switch to a different topic without receiving unanimous approval from their assigned QE Committee— the QE Director and Graduate Advisor must be included in these communications.

Exam Format

This exam tests both written and oral communication skills, challenging candidates to produce an independent literature review paper and defend their work before the Qualifying Exam Committee.

Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Paper

The written exam is a rigorous literature review of the assigned topic, emphasizing critical analysis and identifying key outstanding issues and/or research opportunities. The Candidate is expected to propose ideas on how to address these issues, exploit future opportunities, and suggest and discuss possible future research directions.

The paper must be prepared and written by the Candidate independently— all Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Papers must be submitted via email to the Candidate’s QE Committee, the QE Director, and the Graduate Advisor before the deadline indicated in Table 1.

The QE Committee will not evaluate qualifying Exam Papers submitted after the deadline and will constitute an automatic failure.

In cases of doctor-documented illness, university-related travel, death in the family, or other university-approved excuses, the QE Director may grant an extension of the submission deadline upon the candidate’s request and completion of all required documentation, as outlined in University Student Rules (#7 Attendance).

All students must submit a Turnitin report together with their written exam paper. Failure to comply with this requirement will result in an automatic fail for the assessment.

All Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Papers will be checked for plagiarism before being evaluated by the QE Committee. A similarity score greater than 20% will raise a red flag. The QE exam committee members will then assess if there is plagiarism. If confirmed, the student will receive an automatic FAIL without the report being further assessed. This will also result in an immediate report of the violation to the Aggie Honor Code Office for processing.

Paper Format

This is your checkbox for your report.

General

• Contains between 3500 and 7000 words (5000 words preferred), including abstract, table, and figure captions, excluding references. At the end of the report, please state the word count. Going under or over the word limit will result in an automatic Fail in your QE.
• Includes no more than twenty (20) tables, figures, schematics, or other graphics. These items must be appropriately referenced and cited with sources.
• Uses 12 pt. Times New Roman font with 1.5 line spacing and 1” margins.

Cover page – the name of the Department, Title of the paper (topic), Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Paper, the candidate's (author's) name, members of the QE committee, and date.

Abstract – Between 200 and 500 words, giving a short summary of the Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Paper.

Introduction – (approximately 25 % of the paper) – provides an introduction to the selected topic with a brief review of the fundamental concepts and scientific issues related to the topic. State clear objectives and address the importance of the chosen research topic.

Critical analysis – (approximately 50 % of the paper) – provides a thorough and critical literature review of the selected topic. The adjective “critical” does not mean to criticize negatively. Rather, the analysis requires the writer to question the information and opinions published and present the writer’s evaluation of the material. A critical analysis provides an informed evaluation of the usefulness, importance, significance, validity, and current research status of your topic. Generally, the critical analysis is organized into three sections;

• address individual scientific issues;
• address fundamental concepts and published theories. Clearly demonstrate knowledge of the fundamental concepts required for understanding the current state of the research in the field.
• address the writer’s reflections and individual assessment of the most current literature.

Note: Avoid a superficial, brief review of the large number of papers addressing different issues related to the selected topic.

Conclusions and Future work – (approximately 25% of the paper) –clearly identifies crucial scientific issues and proposes ways to resolve them using available scientific methodology. Does the subject matter have contemporary relevance? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the topic, methodology, and evidence?

Note that only conclusions without future work are insufficient and will lead to an automatic fail.

References - The number of cited references should be between 30 and 60. Indicate references by number(s) in square brackets in line with the text. The actual authors can be referred to, but the reference number(s) must always be provided.

Please include all author names and article titles of all cited articles using the following formats:

[1] J. van der Geer, J.A.J. Hanraads, R.A. Lupton, The art of writing a scientific article, J. Sci. Commun. 163
(2010) 51–59.
[2] W. Strunk Jr., E.B. White, The Elements of Style, fourth ed., Longman, (New York, 2000).
[3] G.R. Mettam, L.B. Adams, How to prepare an electronic version of your article, in B.S. Jones, R.Z. Smith (Eds.), Introduction to the electronic age, E-Publishing Inc., (New York, 2009), pp 281–304.


Oral Defense of the Ph.D. Qualifying Exam Paper

The candidate will present and defend the paper to the QE Committee. The presentation should consist of no more than 35 PowerPoint slides. During or after the presentation, the QE Committee members will ask questions regarding the paper and presentation and explore the Candidate’s fundamental materials science and engineering knowledge needed for an in-depth understanding of scientific issues, concepts, and theories related to the selected topic. This oral defense component is expected to take 30 minutes to 45 minutes. (Times noted are at the discretion of the QE Committee)

Evaluation of the Exam, Qualifying Exam Report, & Results Notification

The QE Committee, comprising three faculty members, will determine whether the Candidate has passed or failed QE by a vote. The voting occurs immediately following the oral presentation and in the Candidate’s absence. Possible voting results are summarized in Table 2 below.

All members of the QE Committee indicate their vote (P or F), sign an evaluation form (QE report), and the QE Committee Chair returns the completed form to the MSEN Program office immediately after the exam.

The QE Committee Chair is responsible for drafting and sending the examination results notification email to the Candidate, including all the QE Committee members, the QE Director, the Graduate Advisor, and the Graduate Program Director.

The QE Committee should agree on the language of the notification. In the event of failure, decisions should be specific to the Candidate and detailed.
QE Results Reports can have the following outcomes:

• Pass – suggestions and recommendations for improvements, if
• Fail– justification for failing QE and recommendations for

If a candidate fails the first attempt, a re-take must be completed during the next QE cycle. A new topic and committee will be assigned to the Candidate for the next cycle.

If the Candidate fails on the second attempt, further doctoral work in MSEN is ended. In such a case, it may be allowable to continue studying for an M.S. or M.Eng. degree in MSEN if Texas A&M University has not conferred one.

Appeal

Candidates have a right to appeal the outcome of their QE Results if the integrity of the exam is not appropriately maintained. The Candidate would need to provide a substantial justification. An appeal is not designed to overturn an intellectual decision made by the QE Committee. Instead, the appeal is designed to protect candidates from unethical or biased behavior and to ensure that the proper procedures are followed.

The appeal must be filed within two weeks after the completion of the QE examination. A candidate filing an appeal must provide written justification for the dispute, no longer than two pages, to the QE Director and the Graduate Advisor, together with a copy of the QE Results notification, QE presentation, and QE Paper.

The QE Director will investigate the claims and discuss the exam with the Candidate’s QE Committee members. The Candidate should be informed about this decision no later than six weeks after the oral QE.