8  Graduate students

Graduate school is designed to help make you a more independent scientist. In the QMEL, graduate students are expected to co-develop their projects with the lab PI as opposed to being handed a specific project. This freedom can be GREAT, but it can also make you feel adrift at times. That is okay and it is expected. Especially early in graduate school, you should be spending a significant portion of your time reading, taking classes, attending talks, and meeting others. The goal is to think broadly and come up with interesting questions.

The goal of graduate school is not to get a degree. The goal is to learn how to think critically, learn skills, and to get the job you want after graduation. My goal as an advisor is to help you accomplish these things. Early and often communication is key to a strong advisor-advisee relationship. I have to know when you need help in order for me to be a good advisor.

During your time as a grad student in the QEML, you will have several responsibilities:

  1. Taking care of yourself
  2. Taking classes
  3. Attending conferences and giving presentations
  4. Working on projects/papers related to your thesis
  5. Working on projects/papers not related to your thesis
  6. Serving as a teaching assistant or teaching courses
  7. Mentoring students
  8. Applying for funding and fellowships
  9. Applying for jobs
  10. Science communication and outreach
  11. Staying up to date on the latest science

There is clearly a lot to being a graduate student. It can sometimes be difficult to know where to spend your time, which is your most precious resource. I use the term backwards design (which I’ve stolen from research on pedagogy) to overcome this problem. The key is to think about where you want to be after graduate school. Do you want to be a professor? Then it will be important to publish, get funding, and teach courses in graduate school. Do you want to work on science policy? Then it will be important to publish, work with local officials, and apply for opportunities related to policy. Meetings with Easton and others in the lab or on campus will help clarify some of these choices.

In order to be successful as a scientist, it is critical that you stay up to date on the latest research. This can be a formidable challenge but it can be facilitated by using RSS feeds or emails with journal table of contents. Setting up Google Scholar alerts can also be helpful for specific key words. You can also consider following scientists or scientific organizations on Twitter.

8.1 Academics

Specific requirements of MS and PhD students depend on whether they are enrolled in Marine Biology or Integrative Bioloy. These requirements are updated more regularly in internal departmental documents. The goal here is lay out requirements, coursework, and timelines more specific to QMEL. There are also details about requirements at the Graduate School level available.

Learning outcomes of a graduate degree from QMEL

  1. TBD
  2. TBD

Key competencies

8.1.1 MS program

8.1.1.1 MS proposal

8.1.1.2 MS defense

Students typically defend their MS about one month from the end of the term in which they plan to graduate (e.g., a defense in early April if trying to graduate in May). The graduate school actually requires this earlier defense date. Students then typically have about a month to address any comments that come out of the defense.

One of the most exciting and nerve-wracking times of a graduate program is your defense day. The day is a mix of celebration and often difficult discussions.

Scheduling your defense: 4-6 weeks before the defense

The day of the defense: Be sure to show up to the room early to test equipment and to get situated. Despite you wanting to focus on the defense itself, everyone who enters the room will want to say something to you to show their support. Easton will speak for a few minutes to introduce you and the plan for the day. You will then have 30-40 minutes to present your work. Your presentation will then be followed by 10-20 minutes of questions.

There will be a weird mix of emotions after the hour-long public defense. Friends and family will congratulate you. You should spend time soaking it in. You have successfully passed ½ of the defense. You’ll have a moment to breath or go to the restroom before transitioning to the private defense (usually in a separate, smaller room).

In the private defense, Easton will explain the format and plan for the private defense. The defense will start with each committee member asking a few questions (10-15 minutes) before the next committee member starts. Once every committee member has had a chance to ask questions, we will open the discussion for anyone to ask additional questions. Easton will take notes to let you focus on answering questions.

After about 30-90 minutes of questions and discussion, the committee will ask that you leave the room. Walk down the hall, take a breath, but don’t go too far. We will come get you after 5-10 minutes of discussion. You will then join the committee and Easton will share the consensus decision of the whole group. There are three options.

  1. Fail (extremely unlikely as Easton wouldn’t let you defend if he thought this was a possibility)
  2. Need major revisions before passing (the most common option)
  3. Pass with minor revisions (it happens, but isn’t super common)

If the consensus is number (2) above (which is the most likely), Easton and the committee will provide a blueprint for what needs to happen before they can sign up on your thesis/dissertation.

You should take a moment to collect your thoughts, write down any notes, and breath. Usually, you and Easton will have a minute to chat. The goal is to wrap up the thoughts for the day and take a break. Once you have captured any important ideas, put your thesis and notes away. In a few days, return to the notes. You and Easton will make a plan at this point to finish and address committee concerns. In the meantime, spend time with family and friends, eat, sleep, relax, etc. You need a break after a day full of emotion.

8.1.2 PhD program

Responsible Conduct of Research

As a land-­grant institution, the University of New Hampshire (UNH) is accountable to New Hampshire residents and to the University community to ensure the ethical and safe conduct of research and scholarly activity. As an institution of higher education that prides itself on extensive research endeavors and the involvement of undergraduates and graduate students in research projects, UNH has an obligation to teach and actively promote integrity in research and scholarship.

To fulfill its obligations, UNH has embarked on a program on the responsible conduct of research and scholarly activity (RCR) to:

  • Raise the consciousness of faculty, staff, and students regarding the ethical and responsible conduct of research and scholarly activity;
  • Establish a knowledge base that defines normative and/or professional behavior to assist faculty, staff, and students in making ethical and responsible decisions in the conduct of research and scholarly activity; and
  • Foster an institutional culture of integrity in research and scholarly activity.

To support these efforts, the Graduate Council has mandated that all incoming Ph.D. students complete RCR training approved by the Graduate School by the end of their first semester. For more information, visit the RCR website.

8.1.2.1 PhD proposal

At the end of year one or early in year 2 (by the end of year 2 at the latest), you are expected to formally defend your PhD proposal. The proposal is an opportunity to formalize your PhD plan and receive feedback from the committee. Your PhD path will surely change along the way, so the proposal is exactly that—a proposal. Proposals in QMEL tend to be more detailed than those in other labs. In particular, we write propoosals in “manuscript format” where each chapter is described with an introduction and methods section.

There is some information on the PhD proposal available here for current students. Here are a few key considerations:

  • All thesis proposals are limited in length to the signature coversheet plus 20 or fewer double-spaced, single-sided or double-sided, numbered pages in a font size no smaller than 12 point. Proposals longer than this will not be accepted, however, appendices and references are not included in the 15-page limit, and must be numbered separately, using lower-case Roman numerals.
  • Each chapter must be outlined in the style of a manuscript with a short introduction (including statement of problem and justification for work), clear objectives, and methods that clearly address the objectivs.
  • A clear demonstration of knowledge of the literature with appropriate sources is important.

8.1.2.2 PhD Qualifying Exam

The committee should be provided with the research proposal ahead of time, because this will shape what they decide is important to cover in the qualifying exams. Questions about the proposal are highly appropriate as part of the oral exam. The qualifying exam typically happens at the end of year 2 or the start of year 3. If the qualifying exam has not been completed by the end of year 3, a student may be placed on probation.

8.1.2.2.1 Outline of process for qualifying exams (written and oral components):
  • The Student schedules dates for the (a) written and (b) oral portions of the exam
  • The written portion does not require committee members’ presence. It should be completed in time for committee members to review answers before the oral, around two weeks in advance.
  • The oral portion requires all members’ participation (in person or via zoom).
  • Use meeting schedulers like when2meet or doodle to identify a two-hour block that works for the oral exam. It is advised you schedule this far in advance, ideally when your committee members have their schedules for the next semester (2-3 months is ideal).
  • The Student chooses three areas of specialization in consultation with her committee
  • Discuss and agree in advance whether the exam is open- or closed-book, time limits, and expected length of written answers (usually 2-5 pages each)
  • Committee members each submit 2-3 possible questions to Easton, who selects and provides them to The Student on the agreed date(s) – often, one question per day within a single week
  • The Student answers selected questions in essay form and returns those answers to Easton
  • Easton circulates all answers to all committee members
  • Oral exam: about 2 hours
  • Committee members take turns asking The Student questions (including but not limited to the written exam and research proposal; general knowledge in relevant areas is also appropriate/fair game)
  • The Student leaves the room and the committee decides whether she has earned a pass, conditional pass (needs to re-do some portion of the exam), or fail.
  • She comes back, we tell her the decision, and go on from there.
  • Once she has passed the exam, The Student fills out paperwork, Easton signs it, and it goes to Lisa Buchalski and thence to the graduate school. This includes nominating her Doctoral Dissertation Committee, which may look a lot like her current Guidance Committee.
  • There are two forms
  • Grad school Doctoral Candidacy form (only GPC and advisor sign)
  • DBS Comprehensive Exam form (all committee members must sign)
8.1.2.2.2 Advice for qualifying exams

The candidacy/qualifying/comprehensive exam can seem intimidating. It will require you to take at least one month off your typical routine (maybe longer if you need to TA or have other commitments) to prepare. However, as long as you study you will pass. Easton and your committee will not have agreed to you scheduling Comps if they didn’t think you would be ready.

Scheduling – Ideally, you will pass your Comps before the end of your fifth semester. Work backwards and figure out how much time you will need to schedule both orals and written exams and study. You will need to propose to your committee that you are ready to take Comps, ideally during a committee meeting so that your progress is fresh in their minds and you have a captive audience. Bonus points if you can make everyone take out their calendars during the meeting and schedule the orals then and there! If you need to email your committee instead, account for how long it will take for everyone to 1) agree that you are ready for Comps and 2) agree on a date and time. Ideally, do this 2-4 months in advance.

Focal areas and Reading list– When planning on your study schedule, you should plan on doing all of your prep work before your writtens, not your orals. You will want to take a breahter/refocus a bit in between your writtens and orals, and having to play catchup is not ideal.

Around 6-8 weeks before your written exam week, write to each committee member to determine 1) what areas of focus they should question you on, and 2) suggested reading lists given these focal areas. Focus areas should be tailored to each committee member’s main disciplines and how they intersect with your work. You can start off with a list you and Easton decide on, and then see what they think. Along with the focal areas, you should solicit a reading list from your committee members. This reading list can be an enormous help in your studying, as the textbooks/review papers/seminal papers they suggest are likely to be different from the reading you’ve been doing for your proposal and individual experiments. They should send you somewhere between 5-15 resources.

How to study – At least 4-6 weeks before your written exam date, you should have all meetings organized, reading material acquired, and focus areas agreed upon. Organization of your readings and notes is critical and highly personal – use what has worked for you historically. Notetaking programs like Notion and OneNote are highly customizable and use a reference manager to organize your resources (ideally in a separate “comps” folder). If it is helpful to you, calculate how many papers/pages you need to read a day – this will help you break down the intimidating stack of reading!

Given the time limits you have during your written and oral exams, having a good recall of 1) what a certain paper is about (i.e. Levin and Paine 1974 is about disturbances in intertidal communities…) and 2) what papers you can cite or refer to on a given subject (Metabolic Theory of Ecology originated from 1997 West, Brown, and Enquist paper). They are not going to ask you about methodological details (generally), or a specific result. Instead, you should focus on the major conclusions, theories, patterns, models, trends, etc. That are discussed in each paper. This is why you will find yourself reading more review papers, textbooks, synthesis papers, etc. Than you probably normally do.

Take notes, ideally both in the text of each paper and in a single document/program so that you can easily refer back to all your notes later.

My master’s advisor once told me to follow the 6-6-6 rule… start studying six weeks before your exam date, six days a week, six hours a day. I don’t think working six days a week is at all necessary, but this structure can give you a general clue for how much time you should be spending.