Graduate school guidelines about committee members

The purpose of a degree committee is to make available to the student a broad range of knowledge and expertise. The committee provides general advising to the student and assists in planning the major elements of the academic program. The committee also evaluates student progress throughout the graduate program. The committee may provide assessments at various stages and it administers the PhD preliminary and MS/PhD final examinations. The committee is not responsible for reminding students of published deadlines, nor for monitoring procedural details. The student needs to work with GDPE and their advisor and monitor Graduate School deadlines.

Students should begin discussing the formation of their graduate committee as early as possible. Formal selection of the graduate committee must occur before the student registers for their fourth regular semester, or the student will be prevented from registering by the Graduate School.

Along with the GDPE and advisor guidance, the following are specifically required of GDPE graduate Committees:

• The primary advisor must be a member of the GDPE advising faculty and have advising privileges in a CSU academic department. Criteria for advising eligibility may vary among departments.
• Co-advisors must also be GDPE faculty members.
• All members of the committee must maintain a current appointment with CSU in order to serve as a voting member of the committee. Scientists without an appointment at CSU may contribute to a committee but are not allowed to be voting members.
• The GDPE Director serves as an ex officio member of all graduate committees.
• Graduate committees for MS students in GDPE consist of at least three members, two of whom must be on the GDPE faculty. Graduate committees of PhD students will have at least one additional GDPE faculty member, making a total of four faculty members on a PhD committee.
• The outside committee person may or may not be a member of the GDPE faculty but must be from outside the department of the major advisor. The outside committee member represents the Graduate School, ensuring that CSU’s expectations are met and that the student’s needs are being met by GDPE. For these reasons, the outside member may not hold an affiliate or temporary appointment only. If the primary advisor holds a joint appointment in two departments, the outside member must represent a third department.
• The student, major advisor, and other committee members collaborate to develop a program of study (logistically, this entails agreeing upon coursework and submitting a GS6 form) and together are responsible for monitoring the progress toward completion. Each graduate committee is also responsible for determining whether satisfactory progress is being made toward completion of the degree according to CSU and GDPE requirements.
• GDPE students often would like scientists without a CSU appointment to be on their committees. Students should work with their advisor to gain affiliate status for the scientist in their advising department. Once the scientist has affiliate status in an advising department, they may apply for GDPE faculty affiliate status, which will allow them to serve on committees. Such applications must be approved by the GDPE Executive Committee, which meets approximately monthly during the academic year.

If you have questions about committee composition, contact the GDPE Assistant Director or the advisor.

Please download the Mentor-Mentee Expectations worksheet, where you will for mentors and their mentees to help clarify each of your expectations about the student’s degree program, and to facilitate conversations about areas where expectations might differ. This is particularly important to do early in a student’s degree, but any time can be helpful, and repeating this annually is a great idea. 

In addition, below are some general responsibilities for both advisors and students

Advisor Responsibilities

• Communicate clearly to the student what the funding situation, expectations, and philosophy are with regard to program goals and benchmarks signifying adequate progress. This should be done early in the student’s program. Conduct an open discussion about publications, authorship, reports, applying for grants to help support research, and fellowships to cover stipends.
• Work with the student to identify a thesis/dissertation topic that matches the student’s interests and builds upon their strengths. When a student is brought on with grant funding, the research may be fairly well defined by the funded grant proposal.
• Work with the student to develop a program of study (coursework outlined in the GS6 form) complementary to their research.
• Help the student navigate the requirements for a degree from GDPE, including; forming a committee, writing a research prospectus, and scheduling required meetings and exams.
• Guide the student through the process of obtaining necessary research permits and assist with research logistics as necessary.
• Encourage students to make presentations about their research often, locally, and at scientific conferences; support them as much as possible but also encourage students to seek additional funding opportunities for attending conferences; provide guidance on how to make effective scientific presentations either individually or in a group (lab) setting.
• Work with the student to improve their scientific writing and enhance their communication skills overall.
• Help students publish their work in appropriate peer-reviewed journals.
• Help establish connections with other scientists who might be useful in the student’s research and future career prospects.
• Provide help and instruction when the student hits roadblocks, whether in research, coursework, university processes, committee selection, etc.
• Be willing to serve as a reference for the student for years down the road.

Student Responsibilities

• Be available and responsive to requests from your advisor. Communicate regularly on progress and problems.
• Be independent and self-motivated in research and take personal responsibility for learning.
• Ask for help when needed.
• Meet deadlines and accomplish goals established by your advisor.
• Manage time wisely to maximize completion of a degree in a timely manner.
• Represent your advising department, your advisor and GDPE in a professional manner.
• Develop a research proposal that will allow for eventual publication of results.
• Be an active member of your advisor’s lab, your advising department, and GDPE.
• Collaborate with and help other students.
• Network with other faculty and other students within the university and at professional meetings. Attend and present research at these meetings.
• Be aware of funding opportunities: investigate and apply for additional funding sources for research projects, fees, and tuition.
• Be aware of and take responsibility for advising department, GDPE, and university policies; requirements; deadlines; and timelines. Be aware that since you are obtaining a degree in Ecology, you need Ecology administration signatures on your paperwork.
• Read the GDPE Weekly Digest that comes in your email in order to be up-to-date on GDPE happenings, policy changes, defense talks, etc. Consider following GDPE on Twitter @CSU_Ecology for additional reminders, announcements, and information.
• Graduate and be successful!

Publication & Data

Early in the development of the research activities of a student’s graduate program, a discussion of publication and data accessibility should be undertaken between students and their advisors to clarify roles, responsibility, and authorship. Generally, creative input, and contributions to the research and writing lead to some level of authorship. First or lead authorship often is earned by those contributions, in addition to writing the initial draft.

Expectations should be discussed early, and clearly communicated and understood by all involved. These expectations should be reviewed and modified as needed during the course of the graduate work with the advisor and the research team associated with the effort.

Students conducting research may need to work with the Research Integrity and Compliance Review Office to ensure that research is conducted ethically and in accordance with applicable regulations and guidelines, especially if working with vertebrates. If the research involves animal subjects, human participants, biohazardous agents, or controlled substances, the research proposal will need to undergo a review process prior to any collection of data.

CSU Research Integrity & Compliance Review: 970-491-1553; https://www.research.colostate.edu/ricro/

Data Ownership

Ownership of data can be a complex legal question, and the student should not assume any exclusive ownership of data that is generated during MS or PhD research activities. The advisor and student should have an open discussion about data ownership in order to avoid misconceptions and misunderstandings that may arise.

Intellectual Ownership

Ideas derived from seminar discussions or lab meeting should be treated as shared intellectual property between the students and faculty member(s) involved. Graduate students have the right to collaborate with faculty mentors other than their major advisor to develop original research and work toward independent scholarship; however, the student should inform the advisor of any such collaborations so that conflicts of interest can be avoided and/or addressed.

Academic Honesty

CSU does not tolerate plagiarism, whether it is intentional or accidental. Unintentional plagiarism usually occurs because the writer’s understanding of plagiarism is not complete, or because the writer lacks a systematic and efficient way to collect and keep track of information that comes from different sources. There are many bibliography programs available (e.g.; EndNote, ProCite, Mendeley, and Pages) that help writers keep track of information and make it easier to cite sources and create bibliographies and give credit to others.

Common Authorship Mistakes website: http://ori.hhs.gov/education/products/niu_authorship/mistakes/index.htm

“Self-plagiarism case prompts calls for agencies to tighten rules” Nature article: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/101208/full/468745a.html

“Plagiarism in Grant Proposals” The Chronicle of Higher Education article: http://chronicle.com/article/Plagiarism-in-Grant-Proposals/136161

Students who have completed a Master’s Degree: 

PhD students with a MS degree may apply 30 credits toward your PhD. This is added to your Program of Study (GS6) under the “Credits from Master’s Degree” section. You do not need to itemize your classes. They are applied as a sum total (you do not need to individually transfer these credits). The result is that you are responsible for completing 42 credits for your PhD (30+42 = 72 credits). Further details can be found on the Graduate School webpage.

Purpose: Your proposal provides you and your committee with a concrete plan of your research, with a goal of making an original scientific contribution to your chosen field – ecology! The written document and committee meeting to discuss it are a great way to get feedback from your committee on your science. You should expect to revise following feedback from your committee. Writing your proposal will help clarify your thoughts, understand and justify the importance of your work, and show how it contributes to existing bodies of knowledge. It also helps you to map out a logistically and financially feasible research plan that can be completed in an acceptable amount of time.  

Different subdisciplines of ecology and the different advising departments who participate in GDPE have different cultures surrounding proposals. There are many approaches, and what follows are suggested guidelines for two possibilities. You should ask your advisor and your committee about their specific expectations. 

Timing: Ideally this will be written in your first year whether you are an MS or PhD student, so that you can get feedback from your committee before embarking upon your research. 

Approach 1. National Science Foundation format

(15 pages, single spaced, excluding references for a PhD proposal, approx. 10 pages for an MS proposal)

This approach provides a good introduction to grant writing, and the page limit encourages concision. NSF says, the proposal “should provide a clear statement of the work to be undertaken and must include the objectives for the period of the proposed work and expected significance; the relationship of this work to the present state of knowledge in the field, as well as to work in progress by the PI under other support.” There are many ways to break down these 15 pages. We recommend that the proposal include the following 4 main components plus references. 

1. Introduction including specific aims
2. Conceptual framework
3. Preliminary research
4. Research approach

1) Introduction. This section provides a brief description of the broad importance of the proposed topic to the field, and highlights the theoretical or conceptual underpinnings, and the gaps in knowledge or understanding that you plan to address. NSF says, “Proposers should address what they want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful.” The specific questions or objectives should be provided. A single page is recommended, with the specific objectives outlined at the end of that page. 

2) Conceptual framework. This section should expand upon the introduction and conceptual underpinnings of the work and provide more detail on exactly what you want to address and why it is important. A review of the current literature is worked into this section. However, your goal should be to convince your readers of the importance of the problem you are addressing, you should not simply write a synopsis of what is known about your general topic. 

3) Preliminary research. This section does not review the broader literature, but rather your own findings, or findings from your lab, that support your proposed work. For a thesis or dissertation proposal, this section may be short or absent. 

4) Research approach. NSF says, this “should outline the general plan of work, including the broad design of activities to be undertaken, and, where appropriate, provide a clear description of experimental methods and procedures.” A good way to organize this section is by repeating the objectives or aims on page 1 and filling out the details of how they will be achieved, including how data will be analyzed and interpreted. This should include a timeline. 

Approach 2. Chapter format

This approach breaks up your thesis or dissertation into the chapters you anticipate writing, which themselves would form the foundations of the publications you anticipate writing. This approach is more suitable than the NSF format if your planned chapters are more independent of each other conceptually. Even if they are part of a larger whole, this approach can help you with later publication. PhD proposals generally have 3-5 chapters, and MS proposals generally have 1-3 proposed chapters. Each proposed chapter should have 3 main components in addition to references (your advisor and committee members may prefer a slightly different breakdown), which themselves may be divided into subsections. The proposal for each chapter should be 2-5 pages, single spaced. 

1. Introduction
2. Methods
3. Expected results

1) Introduction. As above, this section provides a brief description of the broad importance of the proposed topic to the field, and highlights the theoretical or conceptual underpinnings, and the gaps in knowledge or understanding that you plan to address. Thus, a review of the literature is integrated into this section, but like noted above, you should focus on the importance of your problem rather than a synopsis of what is known about your topic. Provide your specific questions or objectives in your introduction. Hypotheses and predictions can go here, as well. 

2) Methods. This is comparable to the research approach above, but typically focused on a narrower set of objectives, as this is chapter by chapter. Provide enough detail on the methods, including a timeline, that your committee will be able to advise you. Be sure to include how you will analyze and interpret the data.  

3) Expected results. Describe expected research findings, including specific alternative outcomes. Presenting your expected outcomes graphically is most useful.  

The PhD preliminary examination (prelim) aims to help students read both deeply and broadly, and to practice talking to a group of experts (your committee) about the field. It is used to evaluate student knowledge in their discipline prior to them progressing to a phase of the program that is focused primarily on research. Performance on the prelim is based on the student’s depth of knowledge in a particular area of ecology and closely related areas, the breadth of knowledge of other areas of ecology and relevant disciplines, and ability to communicate that knowledge.  

In general, it is important to know that we (your advisor, your committee members, the GDPE staff) want you to succeed, and want to help you succeed. Often the questions students are asked reach the boundaries of their knowledge, and that is OK. It simply indicates areas that would be fruitful to focus future reading on. General prelim requirements and procedures can be found in the Graduate & Professional Bulletin here, including the opportunity to retake the exam in the rare case that a student does not pass, if agreed upon by the committee and the student. 

Written portion. The written portion is typically done in one of two ways. (1) Each committee member provides questions to be answered in a single day, and so this takes place over 4-5 days. (2) The student prepares a research proposal, often following NSF grant guidelines. This can focus on the student’s planned research or can be on another agreed-upon topic. Discuss with your advisor and committee how the written portion will be structured. 

Oral portion. The oral exam follows the written exam, typically within 10 days. The period between the written and oral portions allows faculty members time to read the responses, and the student time to rest up. The form and focus of prelims are determined by the student’s graduate committee, and this information should be discussed well in advance of the scheduled exam date. Often the oral portion follows up directly on the topics covered in the written portion. 

Suggested best practices for students. We strongly recommend that students talk directly with their advisor and committee members about their expectations, and to develop lists of readings and topics together. Ask your committee members about how they provide their written questions. For example, Will their written questions be open- or closed-book? How much time is allowed? Will they provide feedback right after receiving the responses? Ideally none of these things should come as a surprise, and if you ask, you’ll know.  

Suggested best practices for faculty members. The main goal of the preliminary exam is to guide students through reading broadly and deeply, and to give them practice talking to a group of experts. For students, the risk of failure and potentially being kicked out of the program looms large, and this stress does not enhance learning. To make the experience productive but not too stressful, please be as clear and communicative with your students as possible. Provide detailed reading lists and questions or topics. The literature is vast, and guidelines will help students learn. Also, please provide students with feedback as soon as possible after the written portion, as silence between the written and oral portions heightens stress for students considerably. 

Historically (and still today in some types of programs), more students were accepted into a program than might be able to stay, and prelims were an exit point. Today, and specifically in GDPE, we only accept students into the program because we expect them to succeed, and because we are prepared to help them learn and grow and succeed as scientists. The prelim is not seen as a way to dismiss students, but as an opportunity for deep and broad reading and learning.

Doctoral students at CSU are considered to have advanced to “candidacy” for their degree upon passage of the preliminary examination (prelim).

Candidates generally retain the status through the completion of the degree; however, candidacy is lost if:

• the student is placed on probation due to insufficient grade point average
• the student’s graduate advisory committee determines that insufficient progress is being made toward the degree; or
• the student is dismissed for academic or disciplinary reasons.

 Students who lose candidacy may regain it, when appropriate, through the established procedures for improving grade point average, demonstrating satisfactory progress, or achieving re-admission.

The final exam includes a formal oral presentation of research findings and then an oral exam. The presentation for the MS degree is typically 30-40 minutes, followed by 10-20 minutes of open questions from the audience. The PhD presentation is typically 40-50 minutes in length followed by 10-20 minutes of open questions from the audience. The exam often follows directly after the presentation but can be held on different day. In the exam, the graduate committee continues to ask general and specific questions of the student, and to discuss the research, publication and career goals with the student for a period of 1-3 hours. The seminar and exam are open to all faculty, students, and the academic community and will be advertised by the GDPE Program Coordinator.

Defense Seminar Announcements:

For all programs, students are responsible for submitting the information of their defense seminar three weeks before it is scheduled. The Program Coordinator will submit it for the CSU University Calendar and send it to the GDPE listservs in the Weekly Digest.

Submit the 1^st slide of your presentation as a jpeg three weeks prior to your seminar. If you are using zoom in your defense, please send that link separately from your jpeg.

Your slide must include:

1. Title
2. Author (you)
3. Advisor(s) name(s)
4. GDPE logo
5. Date
6. Time
7. Location with building and room number

If you are planning on graduating this semester, please review the following details.

You must be enrolled in at least one credit or continuous registration for the semester in which you graduate.

Please work with the Assistant Director when completing the GS25.
Pease work with the Program Coordinator on other aspects of graduation.

Procedures for completing the GS25:

1. Review your program of study on RamWeb to make sure that all of the credits you proposed have been taken.
2. If there are credits missing, review your unofficial transcript on RamWeb to identify which credits were taken instead.
3. Select the “Apply or Reapply to Graduate” link in RAMWeb to begin your GS25. Make sure to drop credits that you did not take and add credits you took instead. Note: if you took additional courses beyond those you proposed on your GS6, you are not required to add them to your GS25.
4. DO NOT SUBMIT YET! Save a draft copy GS25 to pdf and email draft copy to Dr. Neuwald. You will be notified to make corrections, if necessary.
5. Once you receive approval from Dr. Neuwald, go back to RamWeb, sign and submit your GS25 on-line.
6.  Your form will be electronically shuttled to your advisor and the GDPE Assistant Director (Dr. Neuwald) for their approval before automatically forwarding it to the Graduate School for final approval. Note: if there are errors, your form will be returned to you, thus allowing you to make the appropriate changes and resubmit.

Other items due to the Graduate School during your graduation semester:

(Please check Graduate School deadline dates to confirm due dates, we recommend submitting at least 10 days prior to deadline)

1. GS24 – Report of Final Examination Results (Due within 2 days of your final defense exam!)
2. GS30 – Thesis/Dissertation Submission Form
3. GS31 – Embargo Request (optional)
4. Survey for Earned Doctorates (PhD only)
5. Electronic copy of thesis/dissertation (formatted according to GS guidelines)

Note: The GS30 and GS31 must be submitted before your thesis/dissertation can be approved. Submit the GS30 as soon as possible after your defense. Please coordinate with our Program Coordinator (Dawn Koschnitzki) to get your GS25B signed and submitted.

Critical Reminders: Before your Defense

1. Make sure that your committee on record is current. Use GS9A to make any changes.
2. Check with any committee members who have affiliate status in their departments to make sure their appointment is current.
3. Submit your defense announcement at least 2 weeks prior to your defense.

Need to Reapply?:

If you already submitted your GS25 during a previous semester, you will need to log into RAMWeb to reapply. Make sure to change the graduation semester to the current semester.

Please contact the GDPE Assistant Director, Dr. Jennifer Neuwald, if you have any questions about your GS-25. Please contact the GDPE Program Coordinator, Dawn Koschnitzki if you have any questions about your defense or your GS25B.