AV¾ãÀÖ²¿

 

Research Aptitude Defence & Thesis Proposal Defence


The research aptitude project provides an early assessment of a Ph.D. student's ability to work through all stages of research methodology that includes clearly stating a problem, proposing some work that makes a significant step towards the resolution of the problem, assessing the merit of the work in relation to the problem and the research literature that surrounds the problem, and effectively communicating the work. The research aptitude Defence is also an opportunity for students to receive feedback at an early stage in their Ph.D. studies. It is similar to the depth-based Ph.D. comprehensive that is conducted in many universities. The Research Aptitude Defence is separate from the Thesis Proposal Defence Exam. Ph.D. students go through a three-stage process:

Research Aptitude Defence ==> Thesis Proposal Defence ==> Thesis Defence

The work towards the Research Aptitude Defence will be done as part of the Directed Research Project course (CSCI 7900), normally taken after the course work is completed. The project will entail new research work and make a tangible research contribution. The supervisory committee is the best judge of the scope of the expected research contribution, which, as a guideline, should correspond to a fully refereed conference publication in an international conference. It should not just be a literature review or background reading. The project work would typically lead towards their Ph.D. thesis proposal (CSCI 7901), which will expand on open issues and future research identified by the research aptitude project. Students will complete the Research Aptitude Defence at the completion of CSCI 7900.

Timeline

We expect the Research Aptitude Defence to be completed within a year of completing the graduate course work. If the Research Aptitude Defence is not completed according to this suggested timeline for the Ph.D. program,  then the student must report the cause for the delay in their annual progress report form. A poorly reasoned and managed delay in the Research Aptitude Defence completion can be an element that leads to a designation of unsatisfactory progress in the program.

Report and Presentation

Completion of the Research Aptitude Defence includes the submission of a report to an examining committee, a satisfactory presentation, and a satisfactory completion of a question period on the research and related research concepts.

The format of the report is designated by the supervisory committee. A suggested guideline for the format of the report follows the format of a thesis:

  • Title page with names of the student and supervisor
  • Abstract
  • Introduction
  • Literature Survey/Background
  • Problem Statement/Objective
  • Proposed Idea/Methodology/Model/Approach
  • Validation of idea/methodology/model/approach
  • Results
  • Conclusions and future work
  • References
  • Appendices
  • The report should be a full description of the research work the student has undertaken, including experimental details, where applicable. The scope of the work is typically about the size of a conference paper. A suggested size for the report is 25 double-spaced pages in length.

For students with prior publications on the research:

  • The publications should be attached to the report as appendices.
  • The body of the report can be an extended summary (at least 10 pages) highlighting the research contributions with reference to the publications concerning the detailed technical methods and results.
  • The summary should also identify the student's contribution to co-authored papers.
  • The presentation will be open to all students and faculty.
  • The length of the presentation is 30minutes, and the exam will be conducted in a manner similar to an MCS thesis Defence.

Examining Committee

The Examining Committee that will give feedback to the student comprises of the supervisor, two other members from the supervisory committee, and a member external to the supervisory committee. The external member will be selected by  the supervisor and approved by the program Director as part of the Research Aptitude Defence scheduling. The supervisor (or designate) can act as the Moderator of the Research Aptitude Defence. The candidate or any member of the examining committee can request, in advance, that a separate individual moderate the Research Aptitude Defence.

Outcome of the Defence

Three votes (one of which is the external member) out of four by the Examining Committee is required for a Pass recommendation, where Pass can be one of Pass/Pass with minor changes/Pass with major changes. A student may only attempt the Research Aptitude Defence twice in the program.

On the first attempt, the student may be given any of the Pass/Reexamination outcomes. On the second attempt,  the student must be given either one of the passing outcomes or a failing outcome. If a student fails the Research Aptitude Defence, they will be dismissed from the Ph.D. program and are then subject to the Faculty of Graduate Studies dismissal, reinstatement, and re-admission policies.


Procedural Issues

Responsibilities of the Student:

1. After discussing the readiness of the work with your supervisor, complete the at least three weeks before the Defence to initiate the scheduling of the Defence.

2. Submit the research aptitude report to each examiner once the examining group has been chosen by the supervisor  at least two weeks before the Research Aptitude Defence.

Responsibilities of the Supervisor:

1. Select a date and time for the Research Aptitude Defence when the student, the supervisor, and the two committee members can attend the Defence.

2. Select external examiners for the Defence. The supervisor should ensure that the suggested individual is willing to participate in the Defence at the proposed date and time.

3. Enusre that the names of the two committee members and the  external examiner is submitted in  the scheduling system no less than three weeks before the Research Aptitude Defence date.

Responsibilities of the Moderator:

1. Manage the Defence meeting.

2. Submit the comments and Defence outcome from the examining committee in consultation with the supervisor, submit  to the graduate office through the online scheduling form or, failing that, to graduate@cs.dal.ca.