Timeline and Previously Completed Materials

Timeline

For most PhD students (e.g., those entering with a MSc, or after rolling over from a MSc), the assessment should be completed in a PhD student’s second year. For direct-entry PhD students entering without a MSc, the assessment could be completed in either the second or third year. For MD/PhD students on an accelerated timeline, the assessment should be completed in their second year, prior to enrollment in the grant writing course.

Prior to setting the topics for the three exercises, the student confers with their supervisor(s) about possible topics for each exercise and notifies the advisory committee about their intent to discuss these at the end of their next regularly scheduled advisory committee meeting.

Setting of topics:

At the end of a regularly scheduled advisory committee meeting, the student presents possible topics for the exercises. In consultation with the advisory committee, modifications may be made before the final topics are approved. If previously completed materials are to be considered, these must be provided to the advisory committee in advance of this meeting (see below). Once the topics are approved, a date for the Comprehensive Assessment meeting should be set for 3-4 months in the future.

To meet the completion times noted above, MD/PhD students should finalize their comprehensive assessment topics at their second advisory committee meeting. For students with a MSc or who have rolled over into a PhD, these topics should be finalized at their second or third advisory committee meeting. For direct-entry PhD students, topics should be finalized at their third or fourth advisory committee meeting.

Comprehensive Assessment meeting:

A 1.5 hr meeting with the advisory committee is scheduled within 3-4 months of approval of topics. This entire meeting will be focused on the comprehensive assessment - it is not intended to cover topics usually discussed in a regularly scheduled advisory committee meeting. This meeting is intended to be held in-person with the student at a whiteboard; exceptions may be made for advisory committee members who cannot attend in person.

Final drafts of Exercises 1 and 2 must be submitted to the advisory committee 1 week in advance of this meeting.

In the meeting, the student gives the chalk talk (prepared for 30 minutes). Members of the advisory committee are expected to ask interactive questions during the chalk talk to probe the depth and breadth of the student’s knowledge. The chair of the advisory committee (i.e., the program representative) caps the presentation time at 45 minutes total.

The remainder of the meeting is dedicated to providing the student feedback about the three exercises. Guidelines for how the members of the advisory committee should assess the three exercises are given in the Guidelines for Members of the Advisory Committee page. At the discretion of the chair of the advisory committee, the student may be asked to step outside the room. Guided by the chair of the advisory committee, the committee confers about the feedback provided on all three exercises. This is then conveyed to the student in both written and verbal form. Further work on or modifications of any of the three exercises may be required if the advisory committee feels that the student requires further development, and subsequent meeting(s) may be required.

Once the advisory committee is satisfied with the student’s progress, the chair of the advisory committee informs the Neuroscience Office so that the milestone can be listed as complete on the student’s transcript.

Consideration of previously completed materials
In rare circumstances, students may request that materials completed before the Comprehensive Assessment process (e.g., an already published review or journal club article) be considered as fulfilling one of the written exercises. To make this request, the student provides their work to the advisory committee one week before the advisory committee meeting where the “Setting of Topics” will be discussed. At this meeting, the advisory committee, in consultation with the student and supervisor(s), considers whether the previously completed work fulfills the intended requirements of a particular exercise. The written exercises are intended to provide an opportunity to evaluate the student’s independent writing skills, so the advisory committee must be convinced that the student was the main author of the previously completed work, and that the work demonstrates a depth and breadth of knowledge within the domain of study.