The Qualifying Requirement is the first department-wide evaluation of students in the Ph.D. program, and is also the final evaluation for students in the project option of the M.S. program. Students must pass the Qualifying Evaluation within 1.75 years of study, or petition for an extension. The 1.75 years excludes any time a student may be on leave status. This document describes the process for students in the Ph.D. program in Sections 1 and 2, and for students in the M.S. program in Section 3.
There are two independent components of the student's requirements, the breadth requirement (discussed in Section 1.1) and the project requirement (discussed in Section 1.2).
All students are encouraged to complete more than the minimum number of courses, particularly those with a weaker CSE undergraduate education or with interest in cross-disciplinary fertilization.
Upon entering the program, any student may submit a petition (available from the graduate advisor) to waive courses equivalent in substance to any of the courses listed above that the student has already taken at the graduate level, or in which the student has comparable experience. Note that the prior course need not be equivalent in content to one of the courses listed above, but rather in substance: a student who has done excellent work in an intellectually rigorous graduate course on a computer science topic that we happen not to teach may be granted a quals course waiver.
These petitions will be considered by the Quals Committee, a committee appointed by the department chair, three times per year: at the beginning of Autumn quarter, at the end of Autumn quarter, and at the end of Winter quarter. The outcome of the petition process will be decided based on information the committee collects on the prior course and the student's performance in it. The Quals Committee may ask appropriate instructors for assistance in this decision. If appropriate, the Quals Committee may recommend a course substitution rather than outright waiver. All petition decisions are to go into the student's file for reference at the Qualifying Evaluation.
At least 6 graded graduate courses (18 credits) must be completed in our department prior to the Qualifying Evaluation, in order to give us sufficient internal course experience for the purposes of the Qualifying Evaluation meeting. (One of these courses may be in progress: see Section 2 for details.) These 6 courses may include graded advanced graduate courses, but will exclude ungraded CSE 590, 600, etc. (For students with 3 or more waived courses, at least 4 graded graduate courses (12 credits) must be completed in our department prior to the Qualifying Evaluation.) The distribution requirements in items 1-5 above must be satisfied, through some combination of waivers and our courses.
[Note that there are an additional four courses required for graduation after the six quals courses, for a total of ten courses taken for credit in our department or waived through the petition process. Note also that the Graduate School has a requirement of 18 graded UW credits for either an M.S. degree or to schedule the Ph.D. General Exam. These 18 credits need not be CSE courses.]
One goal of this program of study is to demonstrate both breadth and academic excellence, which will be evaluated by the faculty during the Qualifying Evaluation (described in Section 2). There are many ways that the faculty can be convinced of a student's academic excellence, only one of which is the student's course grades. Toward this end, for each student for whom the instructor has more evaluative information than is represented in the final grade, the instructor is encouraged to write a short note summarizing this information to the student and the student's file, doing so in a timely manner after the completion of the course. Examples of such information might be course project performance, instances of innovativeness, and mitigating circumstances. Performance in all completed UW courses will be considered, including those in excess of the minimum number required.
It is expected that most students who demonstrate academic excellence by their course grades, rather than other evaluative information described above, will have a grade of at least 3.4 in most of these courses. However, there is no simple formula that the faculty applies to the grades (e.g., minimum grade at least 3.4, average grade at least 3.4, etc.) in order to decide whether the student has demonstrated academic excellence across computer science. Poor performance in one course can be compensated by very good performance in a related course or project. What is important is the whole picture of adequate breadth plus potential to complete the degree.
If a student is dissatisfied with his or her performance in a given course, the student should seek advice from the course instructor, the academic advisor, and the Quals Committee. In rare instances it may be beneficial to repeat the course, but in most cases it will be more useful to devote that energy to learning and improved performance in related courses.
The objective of the project requirement is early involvement in research-related activity, in part to test whether the student wants to continue in research and the Ph.D. program, and in part to gather information on the student's potential to complete the Ph.D. program, collected over an extended period of individual interaction between the student and advisors. The latter information will be used in the Qualifying Evaluation (described in Section 2).
The scale of the project will be roughly that of a Master's project. Upon mutual agreement, the student will register for one or two quarters of CSE 600 with the primary project advisor, during which the project will be performed. It is expected that the student's commitment to the project during those quarters will be approximately 3-6 credits per quarter, and that the student and primary advisor will meet frequently to discuss progress. Early in this period the student and primary advisor will agree on a project, and jointly select a secondary advisor. It is recommended at this point that the student clear the project idea with the secondary advisor.
The project typically will not include original research, but must demonstrate the ability to work independently. The project may grow from a good course project, but even in the case of an exceptional individual course project, it is expected that there will be sufficient project interaction after the course is over that the primary advisor can evaluate the student's abilities accurately. Group projects can lead to successful qualifying projects, provided that the student's contribution can be assessed; there is no need for the student to work "alone".
The student will write up the results of the project in a short document (approximately 10 pages) written so as to be accessible to all faculty members in the department, and read at least by the primary and secondary advisors. The results will also be described in an oral presentation open to all members of the department, and attended at least by the primary and secondary advisors. The student can expect to be asked questions directly related to the project by those in attendance. Since this oral presentation is not an examination, no closed session is necessary. At least two weeks before the oral presentation, the project writeup must be distributed to the project advisors and the student's file, and the presentation announcement distributed to the department.
Typically, this requirement will be completed within 1.75 years in the program. The student's academic advisor, the primary project advisor, and the review of progress committee will ensure that the project is begun sufficiently early (typically before or during the student's fourth academic year quarter) and is not dragged on too long (about two quarters or less), although there may be exceptions to this timetable due to variations in background or part-time status.
The project may be supervised by a remote researcher (e.g., as part of a summer job) if it is cleared in advance with a CSE faculty person, if IP issues are settled to allow publication of results, and if a UW CSE faculty member agrees in advance to be the local advisor to ensure that v
An evaluation of the project will be written by the primary and secondary advisors, and will be used in the Qualifying Evaluation (described in Section 2). This project evaluation should discuss the following aspects of the student's performance:
The project evaluation should be distributed to the student, the quals committee, and the student's file. This should be done very shortly after the presentation, in fairness to the student, and so that the Quals Committee has time to prepare for the Qualifying Evaluation. If the project evaluation recommends revising the written document or presentation, this may be arranged before the Qualifying Evaluation meeting, if appropriate.
The goal of the Qualifying Evaluation is for the faculty to determine which students have demonstrated the potential to complete the Ph.D. program, and which have not. For each student, the faculty tries to look at the whole picture to determine whether the student has demonstrated adequate breadth of knowledge and the potential to complete the degree successfully. This "whole picture" includes performance in all courses taken, performance in the quals project, course projects, instances of innovativeness, any mitigating circumstances, etc.
This determination must necessarily be made on an absolute rather than relative scale. That is, a student will pass if he or she is perceived as being qualified, regardless of his or her rank among the other students who happen to be at the same point in the program.
In order to be considered at the Qualifying Evaluation, the student should have completed all breadth courses and the independent project (both described in Section 1). The exceptions are:
Except in extenuating circumstances, a student who wishes to take the Ph.D. Qualifying Evaluation in a given quarter must have completed the project requirement prior to the regular Qualifying Evaluation meeting in order to be considered. The student should consult the Quals Committee to determine if an exception is appropriate.
When the student notifies the Quals Committee that he or she is ready for the Qualifying Evaluation, that committee will consider the project evaluation, performance in all courses taken, and any other relevant information that the faculty supplies in response to a solicitation by the committee, and will recommend a course of action to the faculty as a whole. Note that this is just a recommendation to be presented at the faculty meeting: the full faculty will meet three times per year (early Autumn quarter, mid-Winter quarter, and late Spring quarter) to act on the recommendations of the Quals Committee. (Specific deadline dates will be announced each quarter.) At that faculty meeting each student at the Qualifying Evaluation stage will be discussed, in order to add input from the experiences of the entire faculty. Any course waiver granted by the Quals Committee according to Section 1.1.2 will not bring the student's breadth into doubt.
The possible outcomes of the Qualifying Evaluation are as follows:
In order to pass the Qualifying Evaluation (case 1), the student must perform well in each of the breadth and project components individually. If the student does inadequate work in one of these, then remedial work is required. Thus, for example, a strong endorsement from the primary project advisor is insufficient to pass the Qualifying Evaluation if the student has failed to demonstrate adequate breadth. The nature of the remedial work in general will depend on the individual and the perceived weaknesses.
If the student fails the Qualifying Evaluation (case 2), then there are no retrials. Thus, we expect this to be an unlikely outcome for the student's first evaluation, but more likely for subsequent evaluations.
If a remedial is suggested (case 3), the faculty will try to ensure as far as possible that it can be completed in a timely manner (e.g., not insisting on a course that is only offered a year later, unless absolutely necessary).
Any student in the Ph.D. program who passes the Qualifying Evaluation will be eligible to receive an M.S. degree, once the Graduate School requirement of 18 graded credits has been satisfied.
Students may petition the Quals Committee to waive some of these courses, as described in Section 1.1.2, but note the Graduate School requirement of 18 graded credits.