Scope
A doctoral dissertation typically includes some combination of the following: development of new methodology; extension, innovative application, and/or comparison of existing statistical methods in biomedical research; empirical simulation studies; and dissemination of open-source software to facilitate broad implementation. Dissertations from prior students can be found in the .
Formation of and Modifications to the Doctoral Dissertation Committee
Unless the PhD candidate requests an update, the Doctoral Qualifying Examination advisor and the Doctoral Qualifying Examination committee go on to serve as the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor鈥� and Doctoral Dissertation committee, respectively, by default. The Doctoral Dissertation Advisor is primarily responsible for the overall guidance of the student鈥檚 research and training, and the committee brings expertise to the student鈥檚 research, education, and career development. If a PhD candidate seeks a new advisor, a replacement must be declared before the beginning of the following term; registering for research credits with the new advisor the next term is considered a component of satisfactory progress. Students requesting a new advisor should have more than two years of guaranteed funding remaining. The composition of the committee must be approved by the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS). The Request to Appoint PhD Committee form must be completed in Kuali (Vanderbilt's enrollment management system) .
鈥� It is permissible for two members of the Graduate Faculty to serve as Co-Doctoral Dissertation Advisors. A decision to employ a co-advising structure should be made collaboratively between the PhD candidate and the Doctoral Dissertation Advisors.
Meetings with the Doctoral Dissertation Committee
The PhD candidate should initiate meetings with the Doctoral Dissertation committee twice per year (approximately every six months). Meetings should be approximately 90 minutes; they are flexible in format but must include the following elements:
- A discussion of progress since the prior (if applicable) committee meeting.
- Objectives and milestones before the next (if applicable) committee meeting.
- Deliberation among the Doctoral Dissertation committee鈥攚ith the PhD candidate excused鈥攖o assess progress (satisfactory, minimally satisfactory, or unsatisfactory). These results should be discussed verbally with the student.
- If the committee determines that progress since the last meeting has been unsatisfactory, the committee must develop a constructive action plan, review it with the student, and convene within approximately three months to identify whether the PhD candidate is back on track.
- A discussion between the PhD candidate and committee members, with the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor excused. This provides the PhD candidate structured opportunities to indicate any concerns they may have (e.g., regarding scope of the work or the Advisor鈥檚 availability). The committee should help the student navigate these concerns and鈥攖o the extent that these concerns might need remediation, report them to the DGS (if the Doctoral Dissertation Advisor about whom there are concerns is none other than the DGS, the Chair should instead discuss this with the Vice Chair of Education). Students do not need to wait for a committee meeting and may report a concern at any time.
A meeting summary must be developed by the Chair via a standardized form, found in ; this should be submitted to the DGS and will become a part of the PhD candidate鈥檚 permanent record. Appropriate progress is necessary for the PhD candidate to be in good standing. A PhD candidate who is repeatedly placed on action plans and/or unable to meet the conditions of an action plan by the next meeting may face loss of financial support and/or dismissal from the program.
The Dissertation Defense
The dissertation defense must be completed within four years of the student鈥檚 admission to candidacy. The Request to Schedule Final Defense form must be completed in Kuali at least four weeks prior to the dissertation defense date.
The Doctoral Dissertation committee is responsible for administering the final exam (i.e., dissertation defense). PhD candidates must present a dissertation that provides clear evidence of original research and methodological contributions that advance the discipline. Often, a dissertation will take the form of three related manuscripts that could be published in the peer-reviewed literature, perhaps including an introductory chapter and a concluding chapter. The PhD candidate must submit the written dissertation to the Doctoral Dissertation committee at least 14 days in advance of the dissertation defense. If the PhD candidate is not able to provide the requisite amount of time for the Doctoral Dissertation committee to review the written dissertation, the exam should be rescheduled.
Dissertation defenses are conducted in person and administered in two parts, the first of which is open to the public. In the first part, the candidate gives a 45- to 60-minute presentation of their dissertation and takes questions from the audience. In the second part of the exam鈥攃losed to the public鈥攖he committee members may ask questions or discuss any relevant substantive or methodologic issues that remain or should be revisited. After this second period of questions and discussion, the committee privately deliberates. The Chair of the Doctoral Dissertation committee is responsible for running the exam. If all requirements are satisfied, the DGS notifies the Dean of the Graduate School that the student has completed the requirements for the PhD. The dissertation defense must be completed within four years of the student鈥檚 admission to candidacy
for the degree (i.e., after successful completion of the Doctoral Qualifying Exam).