Candidacy Exam Evaluation

Each Member of the examination committee must complete this form

Student Name Student Name First Last
Thesis mentor
Program
Committee Member Name Committee Member Name First Last
Email
Exam Date Exam Date / MM / DD YYYY

Please evaluate the following using a scale of 1 to 5: (1=excellent; 5=unacceptable)
	1 - Excellent	2 - Good	3 - Average	4 - Below Average	5 - Unacceptable
Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Written)	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Written)1 - Excellent	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Written)2 - Good	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Written)3 - Average	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Written)4 - Below Average	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Written)5 - Unacceptable
Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Oral)	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Oral)1 - Excellent	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Oral)2 - Good	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Oral)3 - Average	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Oral)4 - Below Average	Central biological question clearly defined and significance conveyed? (Oral)5 - Unacceptable
Hypotheses stated clearly? (Written)	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Written)1 - Excellent	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Written)2 - Good	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Written)3 - Average	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Written)4 - Below Average	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Written)5 - Unacceptable
Hypotheses stated clearly? (Oral)	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Oral)1 - Excellent	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Oral)2 - Good	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Oral)3 - Average	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Oral)4 - Below Average	Hypotheses stated clearly? (Oral)5 - Unacceptable
Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Written)	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Written)1 - Excellent	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Written)2 - Good	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Written)3 - Average	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Written)4 - Below Average	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Written)5 - Unacceptable
Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Oral)	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Oral)1 - Excellent	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Oral)2 - Good	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Oral)3 - Average	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Oral)4 - Below Average	Aims effectively tested the hypotheses? (Oral)5 - Unacceptable
Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Written)	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Written)1 - Excellent	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Written)2 - Good	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Written)3 - Average	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Written)4 - Below Average	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Written)5 - Unacceptable
Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Oral)	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Oral)1 - Excellent	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Oral)2 - Good	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Oral)3 - Average	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Oral)4 - Below Average	Pitfalls and alternatives were considered? (Oral)5 - Unacceptable
Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Written)	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Written)1 - Excellent	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Written)2 - Good	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Written)3 - Average	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Written)4 - Below Average	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Written)5 - Unacceptable
Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Oral)	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Oral)1 - Excellent	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Oral)2 - Good	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Oral)3 - Average	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Oral)4 - Below Average	Breadth of knowledge proficiency (conceptual and technical)? (Oral)5 - Unacceptable
Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Written)	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Written)1 - Excellent	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Written)2 - Good	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Written)3 - Average	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Written)4 - Below Average	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Written)5 - Unacceptable
Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Oral)	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Oral)1 - Excellent	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Oral)2 - Good	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Oral)3 - Average	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Oral)4 - Below Average	Exhibited independence and depth of thought? (Oral)5 - Unacceptable

For scores in the range 3-5 please provide detailed constructive feedback. Type N/A if no scores in that range.
What are the areas of strength for this student?
What are the areas for development for this student? What might be proposed to facilitate this development?
What is your overall evaluation of the student’s performance in the Candidacy Examination?
Exam Result. Please Check One:

Exam Result. Please Check One: Pass Conditional Pass Fail
For a conditional pass, please propose a specific remedial action required for passing.
Draw your signature into the box below.

Draw or Type

I understand this is a legal representation of my signature. Clear

Full Name

I understand this is a legal representation of my signature.