Department of Biological Sciences

Graduate Programs in EE and MCDB

Comprehensive Examination Report

Student’s Name
Graduate Program
Dissertation Advisor
Dissertation Coadvisor (if any)
Committee Chair
Committee Member
Committee Member
Committee Member (if any)
Date of Examination
Is this a Reexamination?

Satisfactory
Category	Outstanding	Above Expectations	Meets Expectations	Below Expectations	Unsatisfactory
Overall assessment
General knowledge
Expertise in area of specialization
Ability to design experiments
Ability to interpret experimental data
Written report
Oral presentation and defense

Committee Decision

Comments on General and Specific Knowledge

Comments on the ability to design and interpret experiments

Comments on the written report

Comments on the oral defense

If performance on any assessment criterion was below expectations, detail the specific requirements that must be completed before reexamination.

If performance was below expectations upon reexamination, detail committee recommendations regarding transfer to the MS track.

Overview

This report must be completed by the Chair of the Dissertation Committee within one week of the examination. Return the completed Word document (not a PDF or paper copy) to Cathy Barr (cbarr@pitt.edu). After proofing, copies will be sent to the student, the student’s advisor, the DGS and the members of the examining committee.

Reaching consensus and reporting disagreement

The committee chair should seek consensus among committee members, including their approval of the report. A single check mark is interpreted as consensus opinion of the committee. If there is disagreement, this should be noted with the number of committee members holding those opinions recorded next to the check boxes, as shown in this example:

Unanimous Agreement
Disagreement	2	3

Assessment Criteria

An assessment of “Meets Expectations” indicates that the student shows sufficient mastery to continue with the expectation that a high-quality dissertation will be produced.

An assessment of “Below Expectations” indicates that the student lacked sufficient mastery to continue without intervention. However, a high-quality dissertation could be produced if additional requirements are met. These requirements should be outlined in detail, and expectations for reevaluation made clear.

An assessment of “Unsatisfactory” indicates that the student’s weakness would likely preclude the generation of a high quality dissertation.

Written comments

It is especially important that comments be recorded to justify decision made when assessment criteria are less that “Meets Expectations.” This report will be present by the Committee Chair to the faculty when voting on promotion to the third year.