Major Examinations

The First Examination

Each student must pass the First Examination in order to continue in the program. The examination is designed to assess the student’s fundamental knowledge across three areas encompassing the speech, language and hearing sciences. The examination is an early measure of the student’s potential to complete the doctoral program. Students are advised to take the examination as early as possible. Students who enter the program with 30 graduate credits of advanced standing should take the examination no later than the beginning of the second year of doctoral study. Students may not continue in the program after completing 45 credits if the First Examination has not been completed.

First Examination

First examination will involve selecting an advisor and forming a grading committee with two additional faculty members. At least one of the three members should hold a central appointment. The primary work will be conducted with the advisor who can provide editorial assistance to the student and recommend professional development courses as needed. The other two members will serve as graders along with the advisor.

The product will be a paper that includes an article length publication quality literature review (approximately 8-10 pages), and a proposed methodology with a discussion of data reduction. This is intended to be a preliminary to the second level research project (brown bag). In many cases, this means students may focus on a piece of an ongoing project in a given laboratory. Thus, the idea may not be original, but the writing is expected to be the student’s own work, with some editorial assistance from the advisor.

Students may change topic and advisor for their second level research project. In some cases, changing advisor will necessitate a change in topic, because the original topic is tied to a specific advisor and laboratory.

The proposal will be graded on a 1-5 scale (3 is passing) by the three faculty members. The written proposal will be graded for content and style. The literature review is expected to be a logically organized, synthesized, critical review of relevant literature and a statement of hypotheses. The method should be a detailed, realistic description of subjects, stimuli, and procedures that are realistic for a brown bag.

The paper should also include a brief description of how the data will be reduced and analyzed.

To pass the first exam, the student must earn a passing grade from all three faculty members. If there is a single failing grade, the committee must confer to determine remediation. If two or more grades are failing, the committee must confer with the EO to determine the appropriate course of action.

All students who have received passing scores on their written proposals must give a 15 minute presentation at a colloquium to complete the first examination.

The Second Examination (Doctoral Candidacy)

The Second Examination is taken following the completion of all required coursework and the oral presentation of the pre-dissertation research project. Passing this examination advances the student to doctoral candidacy. The Second Examination is administered by the student’s advisory committee and is an oral examination of two hours duration based on the three areas of scholarship that have been approved by the student’s committee and by the Curriculum and Examination Committee. The Executive Officer attends and may participate in the Second Examination.

It is advisable that the entire committee meet with the student to agree upon the three areas for examination and the preparation of the relevant bibliographies. The reading lists should not serve to constrain the scope of the examination areas, but should reflect the literature that defines each area of interest. There is no requirement that each topic area must be represented by a corresponding faculty member. It is assumed that the student will have a more comprehensive understanding of each examination area than is represented by the reading list.

Once the areas for examination have been approved by the student’s committee, the student is required to prepare a statement of rationale that testifies to the coherent relationship among the three areas. The form "Rationale for Second Examination" is to be submitted to the Executive Officer for submission to the Curriculum and Examination Committee for approval. In the event that the initial topics change, the student must submit a revised statement of rationale.

For each topic area, the Second Examination seeks to assess the student’s (I) knowledge base of the historic and current scholarship; (2) ability to evaluate critically the relevant research literature; (3) familiarity with issues that intersect with related disciplines; and (4) understanding of the important areas for further research.

All members of the examination committee shall agree that the student has satisfied all of the foregoing criteria for passing the Second Examination. In the event of a lack of unanimity, the student shall be considered to have failed the examination. . The committee’s recommendation to the Executive Officer is reported to the Curriculum and Examination Committee, which has the final authority for the disposition of the examination. If it is recommended that the candidate retake the examination, it shall be re-scheduled no later than one year after the date of the initial attempt. In addition to retaking the examination, other possible recommendations may include (I) the preparation of a critical review of the literature in the area(s) for re-examination, (2) coursework specific to area(s) for re- examination, and (3) re-examination of one or two of the original three areas.

The Final Examination (Dissertation Defense)

The third, and final, major examination is an oral defense of the completed dissertation. The examination is attended by the dissertation committee, an outside reader and the Executive Officer, who may participate. The chair of the dissertation committee shall conduct the examination.

The Final Examination is scheduled following the submission of the entire completed manuscript to all members of the dissertation committee. The candidate is responsible for completing the form "Scheduling the Final Examination," which bears the signatures of all members of the dissertation committee attesting to the manuscript’s suitability for defense. The form is submitted to the Executive Officer for approval who recommends to the Provost that the final examination be scheduled. The final examination shall not be scheduled unless the entire dissertation committee has read the final manuscript in its entirety and has approved its suitability for defense. The candidate must provide the names of the members of the examination committee, including the name and affiliation of the outside reader, to the Executive Officer. The availability of the Executive Officer should be considered in scheduling the examination.

An outside reader shall be invited to participate in the Final Examination. At the recommendation of the dissertation committee and with the approval of the Executive Officer, the outside reader shall be an individual who has earned recognition as a scholar and researcher in the area of the dissertation research. As a rule the outside reader shall not have participated in any stage of the dissertation process. The individual may be selected from institutions outside or from within the City University. A copy of the complete manuscript that has previously been approved by the dissertation committee shall be forwarded to the outside reader no later than three weeks prior to the Final Examination. The outside reader is expected to evaluate the entire document, to attend and to participate fully during the oral defense and to vote on the candidate’s performance. The format for dissertation defenses will generally follow these guidelines:

1. A brief overview presentation of the dissertation by the student.
   
   
2. A period of in-depth questioning by the committee.
   
   
3. Final deliberation by the committee following the examination.

The dissertation committee shall assess the performance of the candidate and record one of the following options on the form "Report of Final Examination."

1. We certify that the candidate has passed the Final Examination. We accept the dissertation as presented.
   
   
2. We certify that the candidate has passed the Final Examination. We will consider the dissertation acceptable after minor revisions are approved by the chairman.
   
   
3. In our judgment, the candidate’s dissertation requires major revisions. It must be resubmitted for approval by the chairman and two members of the examining committee.
   
   
4. We certify that the candidate has failed the Final Examination, and make the following recommendations.

In the event revisions of the document are necessary, and have been completed and approved, the form "Approval of Revised Dissertation" must be submitted by the Chair to the Executive Officer. The form is then forwarded to the Provost’s Office before passage of the Final Examination can be recorded.

Back to Top