next »

[galactic_hedgehog]

One thing that I found quite helpful was mock qualifiers.  A couple of weeks (usually) before the big day, a bunch of senior grad students would sit as a committee to give the candidate a true-to-life run-through.  (Sometimes they were open to all grad students, but I found them more useful when they mimicked the real thing as close as possible.)  If possible, try to get people who are the students of your committee members to serve, as they might have some idea of what their profs might ask, but most important is to have experienced, knowledgeable people there.

[anon99]

On the one hand, people I respect very much tell me it's an incredibly arduous experience and I will need to hole up and study solidly for weeks.  On the other, everyone passes, and I don't think there's been enough content in my four semesters of classes to warrant weeks of solid revision to commit to memory.

 
Does everyone really pass at your university?  Also the format may be different there, but normally you are asked questions on a variety of topics related to your research, most of which would habe been learned through readings not coursework.  I know the format varies, but you should check if they are only examining you on material covered in the courses.

[ucprof]

On the one hand, people I respect very much tell me it's an incredibly arduous experience and I will need to hole up and study solidly for weeks.  On the other, everyone passes, and I don't think there's been enough content in my four semesters of classes to warrant weeks of solid revision to commit to memory.

 
Does everyone really pass at your university?  Also the format may be different there, but normally you are asked questions on a variety of topics related to your research, most of which would habe been learned through readings not coursework.  I know the format varies, but you should check if they are only examining you on material covered in the courses.

We have written exams and it takes some students multiple times to pass.  We typically have a nontrivial fraction fail on the first try.  Then they figure out they should be doing practice exams, etc.

[scampster]

On the one hand, people I respect very much tell me it's an incredibly arduous experience and I will need to hole up and study solidly for weeks.  On the other, everyone passes, and I don't think there's been enough content in my four semesters of classes to warrant weeks of solid revision to commit to memory.

 
Does everyone really pass at your university?  Also the format may be different there, but normally you are asked questions on a variety of topics related to your research, most of which would habe been learned through readings not coursework.  I know the format varies, but you should check if they are only examining you on material covered in the courses.

Well, if you define comps like that, then that was what my prelims were like. But other departments at my uni and my department at my masters school both had exams that were dominated by coursework questions.

[anon99]

On the one hand, people I respect very much tell me it's an incredibly arduous experience and I will need to hole up and study solidly for weeks.  On the other, everyone passes, and I don't think there's been enough content in my four semesters of classes to warrant weeks of solid revision to commit to memory.

 
Does everyone really pass at your university?  Also the format may be different there, but normally you are asked questions on a variety of topics related to your research, most of which would habe been learned through readings not coursework.  I know the format varies, but you should check if they are only examining you on material covered in the courses.

Well, if you define comps like that, then that was what my prelims were like. But other departments at my uni and my department at my masters school both had exams that were dominated by coursework questions.

What is the difference between comps and preliminary exams?  I'm only familiar with one set of exams for PhD students 1-2 years into their program and thought, wrongly obviously, that prelims were another name for comps.

[scampster]

On the one hand, people I respect very much tell me it's an incredibly arduous experience and I will need to hole up and study solidly for weeks.  On the other, everyone passes, and I don't think there's been enough content in my four semesters of classes to warrant weeks of solid revision to commit to memory.

 
Does everyone really pass at your university?  Also the format may be different there, but normally you are asked questions on a variety of topics related to your research, most of which would habe been learned through readings not coursework.  I know the format varies, but you should check if they are only examining you on material covered in the courses.

Well, if you define comps like that, then that was what my prelims were like. But other departments at my uni and my department at my masters school both had exams that were dominated by coursework questions.

What is the difference between comps and preliminary exams?  I'm only familiar with one set of exams for PhD students 1-2 years into their program and thought, wrongly obviously, that prelims were another name for comps.

I had always assumed that comps = qualifying exams, which in other departments were taken about a year after starting a PhD and were largely coursework driven. But maybe I'm the one who is wrong!

[ucprof]

I'm familiar with different language at different schools.  qualifying exams.  general exams. comprehensive exams. whatever.  They should cover advanced undergrad and intro graduate course work and are the precursor to starting real research.  One typically studies for months to prepare.

[new_bus_prof]

On the one hand, people I respect very much tell me it's an incredibly arduous experience and I will need to hole up and study solidly for weeks.  On the other, everyone passes, and I don't think there's been enough content in my four semesters of classes to warrant weeks of solid revision to commit to memory.

 
Does everyone really pass at your university?  Also the format may be different there, but normally you are asked questions on a variety of topics related to your research, most of which would habe been learned through readings not coursework.  I know the format varies, but you should check if they are only examining you on material covered in the courses.

Well, if you define comps like that, then that was what my prelims were like. But other departments at my uni and my department at my masters school both had exams that were dominated by coursework questions.

What is the difference between comps and preliminary exams?  I'm only familiar with one set of exams for PhD students 1-2 years into their program and thought, wrongly obviously, that prelims were another name for comps.

Varies by school; however, here is what we tend to agree on, here...
-qualifiers are exams administered in the first year to ensure students can teach the basic introductory material.
-prelims are preliminary exams based on coursework taken early in the PhD process; distinctly US programs.
-orals are oral exams in front of a formal committee where questions tend to be research based from a written proposal, but can be almost anything.
-comps are comprehensive exams which intend to do all of the above at once, e.g. can teach introductory material, have completed coursework, and good dissertation research potential.

Schools may schedule each part individually or all together.

[southerntransplant]

At PhD institution:

1) After coursework was done, you took a series of written and oral exams, administered by your committee, that tested your graduate education knowledge. Generally based on grad coursework. We called these "qualifiers." (Actually we called them lots of things.)

2) You then defended your dissertation when ready.


At TT institution:

1) After first semester, PhD students take exams (written and oral) based on undergraduate knowledge. These are known here as "qualifiers."

2) About a year or so before the defense, the PhD students present their research plan and the committee can ask about their research or about anything. Mostly oral, with the written aspect being that the student had to write up the dissertation proposal. This is the "preliminary" exam.

3) They then defend their dissertations when the time comes.

[thundering_m]

FWIW this strategy worked for me. We had three comps (foundations, research, and individual focus area). Each one was a 4 hour exam with three questions. We got a rough idea of the questions but basically it was anything considered the knowledge base of each area. The first part of the strategy was to make sure I had some quality citations ready for any possible question. For each area, I assembled a boilerplate reference list of about 20 books and articles, and  there were some core titles that applied to all three.  I didn't worry about adding to the list once I thought I had a good representation of quality sources.

The reference list became my skeleton study guide, along with the list of possible questions. I became familiar enough with the citations that I could recall the authors' last names, publication  years, and titles. I didn't worry about page numbers or publishers. I could sit down to a blank screen and write them up. I started by just listing the authors in alphabetical order and each time I practiced I was able to add more. I probably practiced this several times a day, sort of at odd moments when otherwise I would have done a quick game of solitaire to shift gears.

For each of the possible questions, I drafted an introductory paragraph. I gradually fleshed out the language for that paragraph, incorporating as many of the references as I could. It was an outline for the answer itself. Once I had a framework in mind for answering it, and felt confident in my use of the language, I was pretty much satisfied. For a while I had those paragraphs each on a card that was easy to review, but mostly I just thought up new paragraphs after choosing a topic, not always writing them down.

I did write a complete answer at least once for each question, sort of like writing a 5 page paper. But mostly that was to rehearse a pattern of introduction, define and illustrate each point, and summarize. It was also to practice using the criteria that I knew would be used to evaluate the comps. How would I grade each one if I were on the committee? That helped me realize some patterns in my responses. During the last weeks, I probably gave myself an hour each night and took three topics at random and set myself the task of composing a fresh introduction and reference list without looking at notes.

I started linking the topics together, and as it turned out, during the actual comps I did just that. I began with an integrated introduction and then addressed each question, and used just the one reference list for all three. But that may have been successful just for this particular school.

So: possible questions + reference list > introductory paragraphs / rubric

[helpful]

I know of a phd committee in social sciences where the comps were designed to result (with later revisions, of course) in three chapters of the dissertation. That seemed to make a lot of sense.

[wsr88d]

I couple of previous graduates in my doctorate program who are also peer advisors suggested that I take comps in the summer term.....more flexibility, less hassle and more of an opportunity to get them accomplished. It was also suggested that if comps are attempted in the regular terms (Fa/Sp) there could be more confusion and frustration with others who are attempting comps at the same time and trying to beat the clock. Seldomly, at my uni do students want to take comps in the Su term.....that is why it was suggested to me that I take advantage of this.

Ran it by my chair and committee last summer term....they approved me for comps in Su '10. I am thrilled.

[frogfactory]

High five, wsr88d!

My comps: I choose 3 committee members, one to be my advisor and the other two to preferably be people whose classes I have taken.

Day 1: Written paper.  Three questions (one from each committee member), six hours total.  It's not yet clear what materials are allowed, but I need to talk with each member about their expectations individually.

Day 2 (1-2 weeks later): Oral exam.  You get a copy of your written exam to prepare with.  Committee members first check you know where you made mistakes and know the correct information/concepts.  Then will ask questions (according to my advisor) designed to find the 'edges' of what you know in the three fields being covered.  At some point the correct answer will be 'I don't know', or 'I don't know, but I can speculate'.

If you cock this part up (as did Suzie) you are likely to be asked to have one more go at demonstration knowledge and competence - in her case, by formally presenting all the content she was confused on some period of time later.

My department is small, so I'm the only one taking comps this academic year.

[derigueurdaguerrotyp]

FF, I'll be taking my comps at the end of March. It sounds like we'll have a very similar format, although I'm in the humanities (and I believe you're in science, yes?). Anyway, I would be happy to be your comps encouragement/motivation/whining/b*tching/despair/confidence buddy, if you want one!

[frogfactory]

Reviving this thread because my committee is sorted and I'm in the process of settling dates.  So far, I've been told one committee member is 'easy' (gives data analysis/interpretation questions only), one is extremely enthusiastic about me in general (and told me that for students like me, comps are just a hoop to jump through and that I'll probably even enjoy the oral [possible - I had a great time at my MPhil viva voce, because it was basically a chat about some really interesting science, some of which I'd done, with two leaders in the general field I hadn't met before]).  So, interestingly, the committee member who is likely to be hardest to please will be my own PI.  On the other hand, I've written a review article and am in the process of co-ordinating and editing a book chapter, both on the specific and general topic she'll be examining me one.

Actually looks do-able at this point!  The only tricky thing is going to be finding the time to review knowledge.  I may have to drop out of the lab for a month or something to make the time.  That would be a pain, since I'm really enjoying the lab right now (and doing some cool stuff), but a month isn't all that much.