cancer biology - augusta university and cancer biology (bcb) graduate handbook 2012 3 general...

Biochemistry and Cancer Biology (BCB) Graduate Handbook 2012

1

__________________________________________________________________

Georgia Health Sciences University

BIOCHEMISTRY&

CANCERBIOLOGY

GRADUATEPROGRAM2012

DOCTORALSTUDENTHANDBOOK


2

TABLE OF CONTENTS General Information............................................................................................................................3 Location and Office Hours Biochemistry & Cancer Biology Phone Numbers Important Campus Phone Numbers MCG Websites Welcome to BCB at GHSU Mission Statement……………………………………………………………… 4 Faculty Research………………………………………………………………… .5-6 Departmental Locations (map)……………………………………………………… 7 We are here to help you................................................................................................ ........... 8 Message from the Chair Program Director Darren Browning Academics ..................... Kimberly Lord Benefits ......................... Bennie Brisco Ordering ....................... Joyce Hobson General Expectations………………………………………………………….. 9 Overview………………………………………………………………………… ................................ 9 Degree Timeline…………………………………………………………………. ............................ 10 Major Advisor…………………………………………………………..... ....................................... 11 Advisory Committee……………………………………………………………… 11-12 Coursework…………………………………………………………… 12-15 Landmarks to Graduation Comprehensive Examination……………………………………………… 16-17 Research Proposal………………………………………………………… 18 Dissertation……………………………………………………………… 19 Thesis Defense……………………………………… 20 Administrative Forms Checklist for PhD Requirements ............................................................................................. .21 Appendix Forms ....................................................................................................................... 22 Advisory Committee Form ........................................................................................................ 23 Coursework Proposal Form ...................................................................................................... 24 Report of Research Progress and Advisory Committee Meetings FORM A ............................................................................................................ 25 FORM B ...................................................................................................... 26-27 Committee Meeting Rubric ........................................................................................................... Comprehensive Examination Pre-approval .................................................................................. Comprehensive Examination ................................................................................................... 29 Dissertation Research Proposal Form ..................................................................................... 28 Admission to Candidacy Form ................................................................................................. 30 Dissertation Approval Form ...................................................................................................... 31 Faculty Agreement Form for the Final Oral Examination ......................................................... 32 Thesis/Dissertation Binding Form ............................................................................................ 33


3

General Information

Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Location & Hours 1410 Laney Walker Blvd., Cancer Research Center Building (CN), 1st & 2nd Floors Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.

Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Phone Numbers Chair: Vadivel Ganapathy, PhD 706-721-3271 Program Director: Darren Browning, PhD 706-721-9526 Department Manager: Bennie Brisco 706-721-0665 Clerkship Program Specialist: Kim Lord: 706-721-7658 Administrative Office 706-721-3757

Important Campus Phone Numbers

Academic Admissions 706-721-2725 Cashier’s Office 706-721-2926 Financial Aid Office 706-721-4901 Graduate Studies Office 706-721-3278 Housing Office 706-721-3471 Registrar’s Office 706-721-2201 Student Affairs 706-721-3356 Student Health 706-721-3448

Public Safety 706-721-2911 Housekeeping 706-721-2040

Chemical Safety 706-721-2591 Radiation Safety 706-721-9826 Information Technology 706-721-4000 MCG Workshop 706-721-2040

Laboratory for Animal Services 706-721-3421 Flow Cytometry 706-721-7323 Fisher Rm. 706-721-0601 BioRad 706-721-7670 Sigma 706-721-0601

GHSU on the Web

GHSU Home page: http://www.georgiahealth.edu

Biochemistry & Molecular Biology: http://www.georgiahealth.edu/BCB

Cancer Center: http://www.georgiahealth.edu/cancer/

College of Graduate Studies: http://www.georgiahealth.edu/gradstudies/students.html

CGS PhD Student Guide http://georgiahealth.edu/gradstudies/documents/PhDGuide.pdf


4

Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry

Mission Statement

The central mission of the Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Program is to apply rigorous scientific principles to understand the molecular and biochemical mechanisms underlying normal and pathological processes in humans.

The research mission of the program incorporates multidisciplinary collaboration, with both basic and clinical investigators using cutting-edge technologies to investigate normal and disease states. Research in the program will be supported by major funding agencies, and the insight gained by the work will be disseminated in reputable peer-reviewed journals.

The education mission underpins all aspects of the program, as faculty participate in the teaching of undergraduate, medical and graduate students in multidisciplinary courses where understanding at the molecular level is emphasized. The education mission is also central to the research mission as students at all levels are important contributors to laboratory research, where they are trained to be competitive for educational and research positions in diverse academic and industrial environments.

The program mission supports the institutional mission of commitment to excellence in research and teaching, and has the common goal of discovery and dissemination of knowledge that can be applied to the treatment and prevention of disease.

About this manual:

The material in this manual has been provided for the benefit of graduate students registering in the Fall of 2009 or after in the Biochemistry and Cancer Biology Program. The material is presented in a manner designed to simplify what can often be a confusing journey to graduation. The rules and procedures stated herein are consistent with those in the manual provided to all Biomedical Sciences PhD students by the College of Graduate Studies. However, it is important that BCB students understand that this manual is a guide, and is not designed to replace the more detailed document that should be referred to for specific information not addressed here. Please visit the following link for details: http://www.georgiahealth.edu/gradstudies/documents/PhDGuide.pdf


5

THE BCB FACULTY RESEARCH

Vadivel Ganapathy Regents' Professor; Ph.D. and Chairman, Madras (India), 1978. Molecular biology and pathophysiological relevance of plasma membrane transporters; Role of transporters in the kidney, intestinal tract, liver, and the brain; Relevance of transporters to cancer and inflammation; Use of transporters as delivery systems for drugs and prodrugs; Transport of nutrients across the placenta; Human placenta as a target for abusable drugs.

Darren Browning Assistant Professor; Ph.D., University of Toronto, 1995. The functions of cGMP-dependent protein kinase (PKG). Characterization of the role of PKG in tumor biology, including angiogenesis, apoptosis and differentiation. Preclinical studies in animal models compliment in vitro work to establish PKG as a target for the treatment of colon cancer.

Shuang Huang Associate Professor; Ph.D., Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, 1994 Understanding the cellular control of cancer cell invasion with a focus on signaling events essential for both cell migration and protease production; therapeutic targets for anti-cancer treatment.

Kebin Liu Assistant Professor; Ph.D. University of Oklahoma, 1997. Resistance of cancer cells to host immune response; Tumor cell-immune cell interaction, acquisition of apoptosis resistance, and tumor progression; Molecular mechanisms underlying abnormal apoptosis signaling pathways in tumor escape variants.

Betty S. Pace Professor, MD. Medical College of Wisconsin. The Pace laboratory conducts research related to the developmental regulation of globin gene expression using primary erythroid progenitors. The major effort has been the role p38 MAPK cell signaling in drug-mediated fetal hemoglobin induction as a treatment for sickle cell disease. The laboratory also has conducted high throughput drug screens to identify novel gamma globin inducers. Genome-wide studies are being conducted to identify genetic modifiers of fetal hemoglobin.

Honglin Li Associate Professor; Ph.D. Wayne State University, Detroit, MI. The long-term goals of the Li laboratory are to identify and characterize novel molecular mechanisms that regulate cellular stress response and cell death signaling. We hope that our study will shed light on therapeutic targets for treatment of human diseases, such as cancer and neurodegenerative diseases.

Muthusamy Thangaraju Assistant Professor, Ph.D. University of Madras, Tamilnadu, India. Role of plasma membrane transporters in the uptake of histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors into tumor cells; Relevance of these transporters to tumor suppression in mammary gland via HDAC inhibition; Physiologic role of these transporters in apoptosis associated with mammary gland involution; Epigenetic mechanisms responsible for silencing of these transporters in breast cancer.


6

Keith Robertson Associate Professor; Ph.D. Johns Hopkins University 1996. Establishment of normal DNA methylation patterns and how these go awry in cancer, histone modifications and chromatin structure; epigenetic modifications in stem cells and tumor stem cells; development of novel DNA methyltransferase inhibitors.

Huidong Shi Associate Professor; Ph.D. Kyushu Institute of Technology, Fukuoka, Japan 1999. Epigenomics, and development of high-throughput technologies for dissecting the complex epigenetic regulation in normal and tumor cells. Epigenetics is heritable chromatin organization and gene expression not coded by DNA sequence. While epigenetics refers to the study of single genes or sets of genes, epigenomics is the global analyses of epigenetic changes across the genome.

Stuart A. Thompson Associate Professor; Ph.D., The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1992. Understanding bacterial gene regulation events (including epigenetic regulation) that occur during infection of humans by the gastrointestinal pathogen Campylobacter jejuni; characterizing C. jejuni virulence factors, and development of an effective vaccine against C. jejuni infection.

Pamela Moore Martin Assistant Professor; Ph.D. Medical College of Georgia, 2003. Discovery and analysis of novel biochemical transporters and receptors in retina which may be useful in the development of new therapeutic targets in the treatment and prevention of diabetic retinopathy.

Dorothy Tuan Professor; Ph.D., California Institute of Technology. Transcriptional control of globin gene expression during erythroid cell commitment and differentiation; gene therapy for hereditary erythroid cell diseases.

Puttur Prasad Professor, Ph.D. Indian Inst of Sci. 1992. Nutrient and drug transporters in the placenta. Post-partum depression.

Nagendra Singh Assistant Professor, Ph.D. National Institute of Immunology and Jawaharlal Nehru University, India. Role of inflammation in tumor promotion and development, probiotics in intestinal health and role of regulatory (Tregs) andeffector T cells (Teff) in cancer, autoimmunity infections and transplantations.


7

WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU

Message from the Chair: Vadivel Ganapathy PhD. (Dr. G)

Educating the next generation of scientists and medical professionals is a priority in the department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. Department Faculty and Cancer Center Faculty are united as dedicated mentors for students in the graduate program of Biochemistry and Cancer Biology. We welcome you to the program and wish you great success in the pursuit of your graduate degree.

Program director: Darren Browning, PhD. CN 1164 Tel. 1-9526 email [email protected] Welcome to the graduate program in Biochemistry and Cancer Biology! The well-being of BCB graduate students is a priority for me and I am ready to help you with any problems or questions that may arise. The pathway toward obtaining your graduate degree can be full of challenges and opportunities for growth and I look forward to helping you along the way. Feel free to drop by my office to chat or send me an email at any time.

Academic Administrator: Kimberly Lord CB2530 Tel. 1-7658 email [email protected] Working with students has always been a highlight in my position. I enjoy getting to know each student and helping you with any aspects of your education process. You will hear from me periodically regarding registration, progress reports, and any news about the program in general. Please contact me with any questions or concerns.

Departmental Manager: Bennie Brisco CB 2530 Tel. 1-0665 email [email protected] You should contact me for any administrative issues, such as stipend, fellowships or immigration. My door is always open for any questions you may have.

Purchasing Administrator: Joyce Hobson CB 2530 Tel. 1-3757 email [email protected] I enjoy getting to know each student and helping you with any aspects of your education process.Joyce helps student order whatever is needed for their research and general lab supplies. She is always willing to help place or track an order. Stop by and chat some time.


8


9

THE PATHWAY TO GRADUATION The objective of the graduate program in Biochemistry & Cancer Biology (BCB) at the Georgia Health Sciences University is to train students to be outstanding and independent scientists that effectively compete for contemporary biomedical research positions. The program is underpinned by the notion that training involves several equally important skills and focuses on academic, ethical, technical and presentation development. Training in the BCB program is designed to address each of these areas, and the key elements and expected timeline are outlined below: Year 1. Shortly after joining the BCB program, the student should immerse themselves in primary literature relevant to the systems under investigation in the laboratory and should gain first-hand expertise in a wide array of techniques. In the spring semester, students should enroll in BCMB 8201, which will complement learning of laboratory methods (see below). Students are also required to audit the BCMB 8340 course, which will strengthen their presentation skills. Within the first few months the student and mentor should establish a student advisory committee (SAC). The student should feel comfortable in reaching out to SAC members for technical or other advice at any time so that they are familiar with the student’s research efforts and progress. This is imperative to the student who must satisfy SAC member’s expectations during three important landmarks: the comprehensive exam, the research proposal and the thesis defense. It is also helpful to the mentor to have a committee that is aware of the efforts and experimental results that have directed the student’s progress over time. It is a mandatory CGS requirement that the student convenes at least one official (documented) SAC meeting within a 12 month period. The accompanying timeline indicates that this could be optimal if held in the spring to correspond with other requirements. During this first year in the program, students should be working toward the preparation of their comprehensive examination (see below). CGS guidelines make the successful completion of this important landmark mandatory by the end of the first year in the BCB program (second year in the PhD program).

Year 2. After the first year in the BCB program, students will have established a SAC, completed the mandatory BCMB 8201 course, and passed their comprehensive examination. The second year should focus on experiments that will form the basis of their research proposal. In the fall semester of the BCB student’s second year (7th semester) students should officially register for the second mandatory course BCMB 8340. CGS mandates that the research proposal must be completed by the end of the second year in the BCB program. It is recommended that the coursework proposal (see below) and the research proposal be discussed together in the spring SAC meeting.

Year 3. Effort in third year in the BCB program will mainly involve carrying out the proposed research and publishing results where possible. Students will generally also enroll in another elective course as decided upon in the previous SAC meeting. Year 4. Students in the fourth year of the BCB program (5th year at GHSU) generally complete experimental work whilst preparing their thesis, which on average is defended by the end of the year. During this year it is a program requirement that the advanced students present their research in the regularly scheduled and campus-wide advertised BCB seminars. This is a great opportunity for feedback, presentation experience and for focusing thoughts on thesis defense. During this final year (on average), students should also be considering post-graduation plans, such as identification of a post-doctoral position.


10


11

THE STUDENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Major Advisor The major advisor chosen by the student has to be a faculty member in the BCB program. The term “major advisor” should be synonymous with “mentor” as the responsibilities reach well beyond technical direction in the laboratory. The major advisor is there to help mold the mindset of scientist; to edit/advise students with writing and presentations, to interpret reviewer’s comments and unveil some of the political and administrative realities associated with contemporary scientific practice. The major advisor should also be instrumental in helping the student to choose and interact with the SAC, and to prepare them for the thesis defense. It is not the responsibility of the major advisor to ensure that the student maintains good standing with CGS by arranging for SAC meetings or ensuring that the appropriate paperwork is submitted to the CGS in a timely manner. These latter administrative functions are the responsibility of the student in consultation with the BCB academic administrator and program director. Other Committee Members Once the student has chosen a mentor in the BCB program and has begun working in the laboratory, choosing 4 additional faculty to be members of the student advisory committee (SAC). At least four of the five members (including major advisor) must hold appointments on the faculty of the College of Graduate Studies (CGS). It is also recommended that 2 of the 4 also be BCB faculty in order to facilitate the proceedings of the comprehensive examination. While the choice of SAC members is primarily that of the major advisor, who is likely to be more familiar with colleagues having desirable expertise, it is recommended that the student also contributes to the process. Once the members of the advisory committee have agreed to serve as a member on the SAC, the student should complete the Advisory Committee Form, including obtaining each members signature and then submit to the CGS. The SAC has several functions that serve the student, the major advisor, and the CGS. The student should feel comfortable approaching SAC members regularly for technical or other guidance and should consider them an important resource throughout their tenure in the program. The SAC members can provide valuable feedback to both student and major advisor regarding the direction and development of the project. In addition, the SAC members are essential to administer and witness several milestones throughout the program, culminating in the thesis defense. Committee Meetings It is important that the SAC be kept informed of the major findings and setbacks associated with the student’s research in order to best serve as advisors. CGS mandates that at least one SAC meeting must occur within a 12 month period. This is important because the student must have the SAC members “on board” in order to ensure that there are no “surprises” toward the end of the program regarding whether there has been sufficient accomplishment to warrant graduation. It is expected that some SAC members will be apprised of the students research as a


12

collaborator of the major advisor, their attendance at presentations (e.g. BCMB 8340, departmental seminars), or by less formal interactions with the student. However, other members may not be available and the SAC meeting serves to place everyone “on the same page”. The student is responsible for scheduling the SAC meeting annually, usually by coordinating schedules of SAC member by email in advance, and when a date and time is reached, an appropriate room can be reserved by the academic administrator (usually the BCB conference room). The SAC meetings should not be viewed as intimidating or unnecessarily formal but should be anticipated in with a positive outlook as a relatively informal gathering to benefit the student. It is recommended that SAC meetings take place in the spring semester each year in accordance with required administrative milestones, including: introduction and establishing the comprehensive examination committee (year 1); finalizing the coursework proposal and presentation of the research proposal (year 2); and firming up a consensus prior to the final defense (year 4). Prior to each SAC meeting, the student should discuss the goals and structure of each meeting with their major advisor, who will chair each meeting. Generally the meetings will start with a brief welcome and overview of meeting objectives by the major advisor, followed by an oral presentation of progress by the student (15-30 min). This is usually to be followed by comments and feedback from SAC members, and then finalized by discussing any administrative issues (listed above) relevant to the timely progression of the student. It is recommended that the student bring any forms to be signed to each meeting (e.g. approval forms for coursework and research proposals). Shortly following the SAC meeting, the student should document the central points (e.g. members of committee present/absent, a short summary of the research presented, and specific recommendations or comments by SAC members). This should be incorporated into Part B of the Report of Advisory Committee Meetings and Research Progress Report Form. After approval by the major advisor, the form should be distributed to committee members for approval signatures, and then submitted to the BCB academic administrator who will forward to CGS. This should all take place within two weeks of the date of the SAC meeting. SAC committee members are also required to submit their semi-anonymous feedback regarding specific aspects of the students’ performance. This is done using a fillable BCB SAC rubric form that will be distributed to SAC members as an email attachment by the BCB academic administrator. The forms are to be completed by SAC members and returned to the administrator either by email or hard copy. The Report of Advisory Committee Meetings and Research Progress Report form will not be turned in to CGS until all completed BCB SAC rubric forms are returned to the BCB academic administrator. The student must ensure that all SAC members complete this form in order to obtain credit for the SAC meeting. The information on the rubrics will then be compiled by the program director, who will subsequently arrange to meet one-on-one with the student to address any issues raised by the SAC or by the student.

COURSEWORK Entry into the BCB graduate program occurs when a student has chosen a BCB graduate faculty member as their mentor after having completed a rotation in their laboratory. Successful completion of the core coursework in the first year in the Biomedical Sciences Program ensures a well-rounded education in the fundamentals of biochemistry, molecular biology, and also cancer. There is therefore less coursework in the BCB program, and mandatory courses are designed to


13

enhance the development of technical and presentation skills that are hallmarks of a good scientist. All students are required to participate in the BCMB 8340 Elements of Scientific Presentation course that is offered in the Fall Semester. This course provides a platform for continuous feedback on the students “in progress” results and on their presentation skills. This is a mandatory course that requires annual registration and participation by all BCB students. In the first spring semester, BCB students should enroll in BCMB 8201 Current Topics and Techniques in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. This course will compliment technical ability in the laboratory, enhance understanding of the primary literature and will provide a working knowledge of the limitations and expectations of methods that will be drawn upon in preparation of the research proposal and the comprehensive examination. Coursework Proposal After successful completion of the core courses within the first year of study, there are additional courses that must be completed in order to satisfy the educational requirements for each programs area of specialty. The CGS requires a minimum of 3 extra courses with at least 2.8 cumulative GPA to remain in good standing. Historically at least two courses were required to be classified as “tools of research”, but the two mandatory courses in the BCB program meet these requirements. A hallmark of the BCB program is the minimal course requirements, largely due to extensive coverage during undergraduate and graduate core curricula of biochemistry and molecular biology (considered to be essential by all programs). In addition to the mandatory BCMB 8340 and BCMB 8201 courses, BCB students must choose at least one additional course from the list of CGS approved courses. The choice of this “elective course” should be discussed with the major advisor and approved by the SAC. It is expected that the Coursework Proposal Form should be signed by SAC members during the second year in the BCB program. Mandatory BCB Courses:

BCMB 8340 “Elements of Scientific Presentation” This course will provide graduate students in the Biochemistry and Cancer Biology program with the essential skills needed to give an effective oral presentation of academic material. Instructors will both discuss and demonstrate critical issues relevant to giving seminar or lecture (e.g. organization, slide composition, speaking style and body language). The course will provide students with multiple opportunities to practice their learned presentation skills to a large audience. By peer-review of course presentations, students will be able to develop critical analysis skills as well as receive constructive feedback on their own work. On successful completion of this course, students will be experienced orators, and will be able to present their research or teaching material in a confident and effective manner. The objective of the “Elements of Scientific Presentation” course is to provide graduate students in the Biochemistry and Cancer Biology program with instruction and opportunity to present academic material to a receptive yet critical audience. Each student will have practical presentation experience and will receive specific feedback to guide improvement for future presentations. Upon completion of the course, students are expected to have mastered the essential skill-set required to create an effective scientific lecture, journal club or seminar.


14

Initial instruction will consist of a limited number of didactic lectures that will focus on key topics as listed above. These lectures will be complimented by instructor demonstrations that will highlight the essential “do’s and don’ts. The majority of the course will consist of presentations provided by students, which will be followed by a traditional question/answer period. Attendance by all students in the program will be mandatory, and each student will make at least one presentation, but only students in their second year in the laboratory will be officially enrolled in the course and will be graded on their performance. BCMB 8201 “Current topics and techniques in Molecular Biology” This is a 3h elective course that will benefit biomedical science graduate students in all programs. This course provides students with the technical insight into essential biochemistry and molecular biology experimental techniques. The material is delivered in a practical fashion using both didactic lecture and discussion sessions by experts that use the experimental approaches in their laboratories. This course creates a solid technical foundation for students at all stages of their doctoral work, but is recommended for new students in the design phase of their projects. Examples of the must-know topics that are covered include: -Basic DNA manipulation, PCR/RT-PCR and protein purification, -PAC/BAC and expression cloning -Genomics, proteomics, and bioinformatics -Creation and use of viral vectors (adenovirus, retrovirus and lentivirus) -Confocal microscopy, immunohistochemistry and in situ hybridization BCMB 9010 Seminar in BCB Research presentation by MCG faculty, students and visiting research scientists. There are currently no measures of student participation or attendance at the BCB seminar series, but this is an important part of a student’s education as it provides a relatively “safe” environment to ask questions and test knowledge in the face of an external expert. As the student begins to accumulate data from his/her research, it is expected that they will present their work to the department in the regular seminar series as an essential “run through” or “practice” in anticipation of the final thesis defense. BCMB 9210 Invest. of a Problem The student works with individual faculty members on a specific investigative research problem. This provides an introduction to analytical techniques and the scientific methods in action. BMCB 9300 Research The student works closely with his faculty thesis/dissertation advisor on an in-depth study of a research problem of interest to both student and advisor. This course culminates in the preparation of a PhD dissertation or MS thesis. Prerequisites: Permanent assignment to a specific lab with a faculty advisor and a defined research project.


15

Other Courses offered by the BCB program: BCMB 8310 Adv. Topics Micro 1 This is a highly focused course designed to provide students with in-depth Infec. Dis. I discussions of pathogenic bacteria and associated diseases. The emphasis of the course will be on the molecular mechanisms the virulence of medically important bacterial pathogens. Class time will consist of student-led lectures and discussions, facilitated by Microbiology faculty. Students will present comprehensive backgrounds of the topics of discussion by critical evaluation of scientific papers taken from recent primary literature. This course will provide students both with comprehensive knowledge of bacterial pathogenesis and increased experience with reading, presenting, and critically analyzing scientific literature. Prerequisites: CGS 8021 and CGS 8022 or approval from course director BCMB 8320 Adv. Topics Micro 2 This is a highly focused course designed to provide students with in-depth Infec. Dis. II discussions of pathogenic bacteria and associated diseases. The emphasis of the course will be on the molecular mechanisms underlying the virulence of medically important bacterial pathogens. Class time will of student-led lectures and discussions, facilitated by Microbiology faculty. Students will present comprehensive backgrounds of the topics of discussion by critical evaluation of scientific papers taken from recent primary literature. This course will provide students both with comprehensive knowledge of bacterial pathogenesis and increased experience with reading, presenting, and critically analyzing scientific literature. Prerequisites: CGS 8021 and CGS 8022 or approval from course director Registration for courses (BEGINNING OF EACH SEMESTER) BCB students should register for BCMB 9210 every semester and BCMB 9010 every semester except summer and BCMB 8201 second year in the program (respectively). Registration for the BCMB 8340 course must be done annually when offered (currently in the fall semester). Although this is the recommended path, it is acceptable to register for the BCMB 8201 course at a later date (e.g. alongside their elective course) so long as the minimum requirements are completed by the end of the program. Research Progress Reports (END OF EACH SEMESTER) An essential component of the research based courses (BCMB 9010 and BCMB 9300) is the preparation of a Research Progress Report Form at the end of each grading period. The student must complete Part A of the Report of Advisory Committee Meetings and Research Progress Report Form. If a SAC meeting took place during that semester then the previously submitted report (Part B of the same form) can substitute. The major advisor’s role is to review the report with the student and make additional comments if necessary. The student and Advisor signify approval of the report by signing the form and forwarding it to the academic administrator along with the student’s grade (U or S) for the grading period. Failure to file the report by the end of the grading period results in a grade of “incomplete” being sent to the Registrar’s office.


16

THE BIOCHEMISTRY AND CANCER BIOLOGY COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION Composition of the comprehensive examination committee (CEC). During the first year of laboratory study the student and mentor should establish a student advisory committee (SAC) composed of the major advisor and 4 graduate faculty members who have sufficient expertise to form a supportive team for the student. If a majority of the SAC has primary affiliation in BCB, then they can serve as the CEC, which requires a minimum of 4 members including the major advisor. In most circumstances the CEC will be identical to the SAC in order to ensure that the SAC members are all engaged in the students’ progress. However, if the SAC has too few BCB faculty, then the SAC and the CEC chair should identify additional BCB faculty to ensure that the majority of the CEC have primary appointments in BCB.

The Graduate Program Director is responsible for oversight of the graduate program’s Comprehensive Examinations and will serve as chair of the program’s CEC. In cases of real or perceived conflict of interest regarding the student’s performance, appointment of a faculty member other than the Program Director as Examination Committee chair is required, but must be approved by the Dean. The major advisor cannot serve as the CEC chair under any circumstances. Responsibilities of the CEC. Before the end of the sixth semester as a student at GHSU (second semester in the BCB program), the student should meet with their SAC to acquaint them with possible avenues of research and to define the specific knowledge-base that will set the stage for the Comprehensive Examination. The CEC will work with the student’s Major Advisor to create that student’s Comprehensive Exam in a manner that will test: (1) the student’s mastery of their chosen field of study, and (2) the student’s ability to thoughtfully and critically integrate this information into coherent questions that can be addressed experimentally.

The Examination Committee chair serves as liaison to the Dean’s Office and sees that all procedures of the examination are conducted within the policies and guidelines of the College of Graduate Studies. Scheduling the Comprehensive Examination should be done at least two weeks prior to the proposed date using the Comprehensive Exam Pre-Approval form, which is submitted through the CEC chair (generally the Program Director) for approval. Once confirmation of the proposed examination is obtained, the director will provide the student with the approved form. The results of the examination are submitted for approval to the Department Chair on the Comprehensive Examination Form. The Department Chair forwards the form to the Dean.

It is the responsibility of the Examination Committee, the Graduate Program Director, and the Department Chair to determine whether or not the student has passed the examination. The examination is expected to be administered by the end of the seventh semester at GHSU. Students who do not complete this important milestone will receive an “incomplete” grade on the BCMB 9210 course. In the event of failure, a student will be afforded one opportunity to retake the exam after additional study, typically within three months. Failing the retake of the examination will result in the student being considered for dismissal from the graduate program and School of Graduate Studies.


17

Structure of the Comprehensive Examination. The comprehensive examination is composed of two sections as described below: Written Component: The student will prepare a realistic research proposal relevant to their interests and within the realm of their chosen laboratory. The proposal should not be overly focused on technical details, but should illustrate a solid knowledge of experimental approaches, and thoughtful attention should be given to expected outcomes and the impact of the project on the field as a whole. The proposal should conform to established NIH post-doctoral fellowship guidelines without administrative and budgetary paperwork (see detailed instructions in the BCB written Comp Exam Instructions). The document must be the student’s independent work and not excerpts from the Major Advisor’s grant proposals or manuscripts. The Major Advisor may provide minor input in the form of grantsmanship and suggestions on content and organization, but should not directly edit or revise the document. The SAC will grade both written and oral portions of the examination using the “-1, 0, +1” scale, (unacceptable, basic understanding, outstanding respectively). The main objective of this written component of the Comprehensive Examination is to assess student aptitude as an investigator, and therefore the work proposed is not binding as a thesis plan. It is equally important to note that the dissertation Research Proposal is a separate requirement of the College of Graduate Studies that is independent of the Comprehensive Examination. Generally the Research Proposal can be compiled when the student’s research efforts have produced sufficient data to outline significant research aims that will form the framework of their thesis (not later than the end of the 9th semester). However, under rare circumstances, the CEC may recommend to the student and SAC that the written component of the Comprehensive Examination could form the basis for the official Research Proposal, and possible submission to an external funding agency. Oral Component: No more than five weeks following submission of the written component of the Comprehensive Examination, the student and CEC should convene a meeting to administer the oral component. This will consist of a brief oral presentation by the student that is based upon the written proposal (approximately 30 minutes), followed by sequential questioning by the CEC members. The question/answer period can be from 30-90 minutes, for a maximal examination time of 2 hours. When all questions have been addressed, the student will take a recess from the room while their performance during the oral component is graded in terms of their knowledge-base and their understanding of the relevant experimental design and ability to interpret results. After deliberation, the student can re-enter the room for a briefing on their performance and any recommendations for improvement. Members of the CEC will also use the “-1, 0, +1” system to grade the oral presentation component, and the final grading of the Comprehensive Examination will be based on combined scores from both written and oral components. The combined scores from both written and oral components of the exam must be equal to “+2”. A passing grade of “+1” for each of the oral and written components will therefore produce an overall passing grade of “+2”, but greater performance in either component can compensate for the other (e.g. “+2” written but “0” oral).


18

RESEARCH PROPOSAL The research proposal is an important milestone in the path towards graduation because it encourages the student to focus their studies on specific questions. It also forces one to look at the experimental results from a larger perspective that is central to creating the thesis later in the program. Finally, the research proposal should be considered as a structural framework that if carried out successfully, will result in a thesis of sufficient breadth and significance to warrant successful graduation. The research proposal should not be considered to be a binding contract, or a promise to successfully complete the proposed experiments, but it does bind the student to a specific study area. Failure to complete experiments outlined in the research proposal should be explained to the committee in subsequent SAC meeting. The research proposal must be completed by the end of the 9th semester at GHSU (2nd year in the research laboratory). Instructions for Writing a Research Proposal Following the outline below, provide the details of the proposal.

(1) Hypothesis and Specific Aims. State the hypothesis to be tested and the specific aims of the research proposal.

(2) Background and Significance. Describe briefly the background to the proposal, including relevant studies

by other investigators. State concisely the importance of the research described in this proposal by relating the specific aims to broad, long-term research objectives in the field.

(3) Research Design and Methods. Provide a description of:

Research design and the specific procedures to be used to accomplish the specific aims;

Tentative sequence for the investigation;

Statistical procedures by which the data will be analyzed; and

Any procedures, situations, or materials that may be hazardous to personnel and the precautions to be exercised.

Potential experimental difficulties should be discussed together with alternative approaches that could achieve the desired aims.

(4) Previous Work Done in this or Related Fields. Describe briefly any work you have done that is pertinent to

this project or demonstrates your ability to carry out the study plan. (5) Personal Publications. Cite your most important published and pending scientific publications in this or

related work. Include all authors in the same order as they appear in the journals, as well as titles of articles and complete literature references.

(6) Provide Literature Citations at the end of the research proposal for any published work referenced in the

proposal. Each citation must include names of all authors, titles, book or journal, volume number, inclusive page numbers, and year of publication.

(7) Human Subjects/Vertebrate Animals. Provide the rationale for the choice of any experimental animals or

procedures involving human subjects. Also, summarize the gender and racial/ethnic composition of any human subject population.

SUBMIT RESEARCH PROPOSAL ON PLAIN 8 1/2” X 11” PAPER.


19


20

Residence and Time Limits The minimum requirement for the Doctor of Philosophy degree is three full academic years beyond the bachelor's degree, which cannot be satisfied through summer work alone. At least two full consecutive semesters must be spent in residence on the campus. If the student has part-time duties (employment or an assistantship), the residence requirements will be increased accordingly to provide the equivalent of two semesters of full-time study in residence. All course work and other requirements for the Doctor of Philosophy degree, including the Final Oral Examination, must be completed within seven (7) consecutive calendar years from the date of enrollment in the School of Graduate Studies. Leaves of absence do not extend the seven-year limit. It is the student's responsibility to meet all the requirements for the degree in the proper sequence and in the time limits specified in this document. For students in combined MD/PhD or DMD/PhD degree programs, the seven-year limit does not include semesters of enrollment in the professional degree program. Where circumstances warrant, a student may petition the Dean for exceptions to this residence and time limit policy. Admission to Candidacy for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree A student will be admitted to candidacy for this degree by the Dean following successful completion of the research tools requirement, acceptance of the coursework proposal and research proposal, and passing of the first and second comprehensive exams. A completed Admission to Candidacy Form must be submitted to the Dean. The Dean notifies the student in writing of his/her admission to candidacy. Until this occurs, graduate courses taken are not credited toward the degree. A student must be eligible for candidacy for the Ph.D. degree at least two semesters before the proposed graduation date. Dissertation The dissertation is required of all Ph.D. candidates. It is the culmination of an original investigation leading to new information that gives evidence of independent thinking, scholarly ability and critical judgment, and indicates familiarity with research methods and techniques. The dissertation should characterize in a scholarly manner the importance of this information as it applies to the field of study. Publication of the dissertation in one or various forms is urged, but not required. Defense (Final Oral Examination) of the dissertation is required and must be completed within two years of admission to candidacy. Otherwise, a student must undergo re-examination. Directions for preparation of the written aspects of the dissertation are available from the College of Graduate Studies’ office and at the forms web site: http://georgiahealth.edu/gradstudies/students.html The dissertation should be the work of the student with only organizational and editorial input from the mentor. Generally there are two acceptable formats; the first being a traditional manuscript; with Aims, Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, References sections. The student should pay particular attention to the Methods section, which should be much more detailed than a typical published paper so as to enable future investigators to easily reproduce or continue the work in their laboratory. In addition, highly compact/crowded figures generally encouraged in manuscripts with limited publication space should be avoided in a dissertation, which in contrast should focus more on presenting the information in the most clear and understandable format possible. The alternative format for a dissertation that is acceptable is the compilation of papers if the thesis work has been published. However, a common introduction and discussion is required and the methods should be expanded as described for the


21

recommended traditional format. This alternative format is rarer, and often is preferred in cases where several loosely related projects are carried out rather than a larger project with several inter-related sub-topics. Extra attention is required by students opting to use the alternative format for their dissertation because published manuscripts generally have several contributing authors, and since a dissertation reflects the students work it is imperative that notarized acknowledgement the role of each coauthor be included. Moreover, if GHSU students are coauthors on any of the manuscripts, it is very important to provide a notarized letter from the student that acknowledging that they resign their claims on any data included in the dissertation. The same data cannot be included in two different dissertations. Approval of the Dissertation The student and Advisory Committee should follow the procedures listed for approval of the dissertation. A good draft of the dissertation, proof-read and corrected (in pencil) by the student and

approved by the Major Advisor, is distributed by the student to members of the Advisory Committee at least five (5) weeks before the date of the student’s final oral examination.

At least three (3) weeks before the oral examination, the dissertation should be approved by the Advisory Committee and the Dissertation Approval Form submitted to the Dean. The signed form indicates that the members of the committee have read the draft copy of the dissertation and find it acceptable for the purpose of examining the student. The student will be responsible for making all changes recommended by the committee.

Final Oral Examination Satisfactory performance on the Final Oral Examination, in which the student defends his/her dissertation before the Advisory Committee, dissertation readers, faculty, students and the public, is required. This examination is based primarily on the dissertation and the field of knowledge that constitutes the student's major subject. The student must be enrolled in the semester that the examination is administered. The Dean or his appointed representative chairs all Final Oral Examinations for the Doctor of Philosophy degree. In addition, external examiners (readers) must be present. The readers participate in the exam and vote along with the student’s Advisory Committee on the student’s performance. A majority vote of the examining committee is required for satisfactory performance.

It is the responsibility of the student and his/her Major Advisor to select two or three readers for approval by the Dean. After approval, the student contacts the readers to determine that they will be available to serve in this capacity. The Graduate Studies’ office must be notified when the readers agree. The Dean and readers must receive a corrected copy of the dissertation approved by the Advisory Committee at least two (2) weeks before the Final Oral Examination is scheduled.

The student should contact the College of Graduate Studies office, Advisory Committee, and readers to arrange a time that all individuals will be able to attend the oral examination. Once the time is established, notification in writing is sent to the Dean on a completed Oral Examination Faculty Agreement Form. The examination is open to the public. Departments will be responsible for typing the printed Program Announcement. These announcements must be


22

mailed to students and faculty of the area of study (i.e., graduate nursing faculty and students, biomedical sciences faculty and students, etc.). The Graduate Studies office provides mailing labels. The student may call to request labels three days in advance of the mailing. A sample of the Final Oral Examination announcement is included in the "Thesis/Dissertation Preparation" document available in the College of Graduate Studies office and at the forms web site. The Final Oral Examination Form, provided by the College of Graduate Studies office, is completed at the end of the examination by the committee, readers, and Dean.

After the Final Oral Examination, three final copies of the dissertation on Crane’s Thesis Paper bearing the signatures of the Major Advisor and Department Chair are submitted to the Dean at least one week before graduation. Application for Graduation Each candidate for a graduate degree must apply for graduation. The Application for Graduation Form is available in the Graduate Studies office. Please read the application carefully and provide ALL requested information. Return the completed application to the Graduate Studies office. This application informs the Graduate Studies office and the Registrar’s office whether or not you will be attending May graduation and/or the Graduate Studies Hooding Ceremony. It also enables the GHSU Bookstore to order the appropriate regalia in time for graduation. If a student believes that s/he will complete the requirements during the spring semester, the form should be completed and returned to the Graduate Studies office. If the form indicates that a student will graduate in time for the May commencement and the degree requirements are not met by that time, the student will NOT be charged for ordering regalia. However, if the requirements are completed in time for the May commencement and this form has not been returned, regalia may not be available for participation in hooding and graduation exercises. The Registrar also uses these forms to obtain the names for the Commencement Program for graduation and the correct names for diplomas. If an Application for Graduation has not been completed, the student will not be listed in the program. Satisfactory Fulfillment of All Degree Requirements Satisfactory fulfillment of any additional requirements of the student's major department or the institution is required. Three final, signed copies of the dissertation on Crane’s Thesis Paper must be received in the College of Graduate Studies office at least one week prior to the date of graduation. A recommendation for graduation signed by the Chair of the student’s department (or for nursing programs, the Associate Dean for Graduate Programs and Research), and the Dean of the College of Graduate Studies is submitted to the Registrar verifying that the student has completed all requirements. The recommendation for graduation memo is forwarded to the program director for the chair's signature by the office staff of graduate studies. The completed memo is returned to the Dean’s office. It is forwarded from the Dean’s office to the Registrar after all required program documentation has been submitted.


23

AppendixB:RequiredForms

Form:

Choice of Advisory Committee BCB SAC rubric (fillable) Report of SAC Meeting Coursework Proposal BCB written Comp Exam Instructions Comprehensive Exam Pre-approval Comprehensive Exam Result Dissertation Research Proposal Research Proposal Rubric Admission to Candidacy Dissertation Approval Agreement for Oral Exam date/time Dissertation Evaluation Rubric PhD Checklist Glossary: BCB -Biochemistry and Cancer Biology (Program in) BMB or BCMB -Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (Department of) CEC -Comprehensive Examination Committee CGS -College of Graduate Studies GHSU -Georgia Health Sciences University MCG -College of Medicine or Medical College of Georgia PhD -Doctor of Philosophy SAC -Student Advisory Committee

Rev. 6-2010

Advisory Committee Doctor of Philosophy Degree

Name of Student: ___________________________________________________________________________ Graduate Program: __________________________________________________________________________ The Advisory Committee is composed of five individuals, one of whom is the student's Major Advisor. The Major Advisor, after consultation with the student, recommends to the Department Chair the names of four additional members of the faculty who have agreed to serve as members of the student's Advisory Committee. If a Co-Major Advisor has been appointed, s/he is one of the five committee members. At least four of the five members must hold appointments on the faculty of the School of Graduate Studies. One or two members of the committee may be from outside the student's major department or program. The advisory committee members should be selected as soon as possible after the Major Advisor is chosen. The Dean must approve the members of the Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee's function is to assist the student in the following activities:

• Selection of courses pertinent to the objectives of the student's educational program • Planning of the student's research/project • Assisting in preparing and administering the Comprehensive Exam • Critical review of the research in progress • Defense of the dissertation

Students must hold at least one Advisory Committee meeting each year. Individual graduate programs may require more frequent meetings. All members are expected to be present at all Committee meetings. The Advisory Committee members serve as scientific resources to the student throughout his/her training, and are responsible for monitoring and evaluating the student’s academic and research progress. The Advisory Committee’s responsibilities include approving the student’s coursework proposal, research proposal, and dissertation, administering the Final Oral Examination (dissertation defense), and determining its outcome. If you are willing to serve on the student’s committee indicated above, please sign in the space below beside your name.

Name Signature Date Major Advisor Department Chair (For PhD in Nursing obtain signature from SON Associate Dean for Academic affairs) Dean, School of Graduate Studies

Please return to Kimberly Lord ([email protected], CN 1166)

EVALUATION RUBRIC: Annual Committee Meeting

Student’s Name: Graduate Program: Biochemistry & Cancer Biology

Committee Member Name: ____________________________ Date: _____________________

Evaluation/Guidance Poor –provide explanation

Acceptable

Excellent

Scientific Project Significance

Impact on the field, medicine/compelling rationale

Hypothesis Scope & Depth Appropriate/supported by data or papers

Aims/Experimental DesignAppropriate design/reasonable expectations/critical mass

Progress Strong preliminary data/presentations/publications

Student Development Presentation Skills

Slide quality/communication skill/organization

Knowledge Base Is the student “well read”/ understand wider implications in

addition to technical details.

Response to Questions Ability to “think on their feet”/accepting critique

Advisory Committee comments. Please provide suggestions to guide the student’s future efforts for improvement in both categories (Scientific Project and Student Development). Results are confidential and only anonymous, summarized data will be made available to student and mentor. Continue on back if needed.

Scientific Project: Student Development:

Rev. 6-2010

Report of Research Progress and Advisory Committee Meetings NOTE: Students are required to meet with their Advisory Committees AT LEAST ONCE PER YEAR. If this report reflects the 3rd semester without a documented meeting, the student will receive a grade of UNSATISFACTORY for his/her research credit hours. RESEARCH PROGRESS REPORT: The student and Major Advisor are responsible for submitting a research progress report or an Advisory Committee meeting report at the end of each semester in which the student is enrolled for credit hours that are related to research (Investigation of a Problem or Thesis/Dissertation). This report will assist the student and his/her Advisor in focusing on the research objectives accomplished during the period and those that will be accomplished in the subsequent grading period. It is a mechanism for the student and Advisor to determine if “timely progress” is being made. The student must complete the form and submit it to his/her Advisor for approval. The Advisor’s role is to review the report with the student and make additional comments if necessary. The student and Advisor signify approval of the report by signing the form and forwarding it to the Program Director along with the student’s grade (U or S) for the grading period. Failure to file the report by the end of the grading period results in a grade of UNSATISFACTORY being sent to the Registrar’s office. Should the Advisor disagree with the student’s assess-ment, s/he is responsible for placing in writing comments indicating the specific areas of disagreement, giving the student a copy of the comments and forwarding the form, grade and the comments to the Program’s Director. Copies of the report form are forwarded to the Dean’s office by the Program Director and placed in the student’s file.

The Research Progress Report should consist of two sections. Both must be completed EXCEPT for those students enrolled in the course for the first time. For them, only the second section must be completed. I. State the specific objectives achieved during this grading period in your research program. Relate the completed objectives to those you proposed to complete in your previous report and the specific aims stated in your research proposal, if appropriate. If you were unable to complete a proposed objective, state the reason(s) why and indicate what the effect may be on your progress toward completing your thesis/research project. II. State the research objectives you propose to complete during your next enrollment period. These objectives should be agreed to by you and your Major Advisor.

REPORT OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING: The student and Major Advisor are responsible for submitting an Advisory Committee meeting report at the end of each semester in which such a meeting occurred. The Advisory Committee Meeting Report serves as the student’s Research Progress Report for that semester. The Advisory Committee Meeting Report should begin with an outline or description of the materials to be presented and discussed. This should be prepared prior to the meeting, using the first page of the attached form with additional pages attached as necessary. All Advisory Committee members, the major advisor, and the student must sign the completed Report form, which is then submitted to the Program Director. Copies of the report form are forwarded to the Dean’s office by the Program Director and placed in the student’s file.

Report of Research Progress and/or Advisory Committee Meeting Doctor of Philosophy Degree

Student Name:__________________________________ Major Advisor: ______________________________ Graduate Program:_______________________________ Grading Period and Year: ______________________ Did you meet with your Advisory Committee this grading period? YES NO If YES, Date of Meeting: __________________________________________

NOTE: Students are required to meet with their Advisory Committees AT LEAST ONCE PER YEAR. If this report reflects the 3rd semester without a documented meeting, you will receive a grade of UNSATISFACTORY for your research credit hours.

USE THE SPACE BELOW FOR: RESEARCH PROGRESS REPORT: Include specific objectives achieved this grading period and research objectives for next grading period. Use additional pages as necessary. OR FOR: OUTLINE FOR COMMITTEE MEETING, if held: Fill out prior to meeting. List and identify any attachments, e.g., handouts. Summary Report with Advisory Committee members’ signatures also required, NEXT PAGE. _________________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Student’s Signature Advisor’s Signature

Rev. 6-2010

NOTES/SUMMARY OF ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING (entered at meeting or completed afterward if extensive) Approved by Student and Advisory Committee: Date of Meeting: _______________________

Approved by Advisory Committee and Student:

Attended Attended

Rev. 6-2010

1. 5.

2. 6. 3. 7. 4. 8.

Date: _______________________________

Program Director: ______________________

Rev. 6-2010

Coursework Proposal Doctor of Philosophy Degree

Name ___________________________________ Graduate Program ________________________________ If you approve the coursework proposed below, sign your name in the space indicated. The Major Advisor must indicate his/her approval before the student may circulate this proposal to the other members of the committee.

Name Signature Date Major Advisor Department Chair (For PhD in Nursing obtain signature from SON Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) Dean, School of Graduate Studies Include all required core courses, electives, and research courses. Please use an asterisk to indicate which courses satisfy the Research Tool Requirement. Course

No. Title Credit

Hrs. Course

No. Title Credit

Hrs.

Instructions for the written component of the Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

Comprehensive examination

.

This document is a modified excerpt of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Public health Service:

SF424 (R&R) Individual Fellowship Application Guide

A guide developed and maintained by NIH for

preparing and submitting individual fellowship applications to NIH using the SF424 (R&R)

College of Medicine

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology

PHS SF424 (R&R) Individual Fellowship Application Guide

General Formatting Instructions:

Preparation of all applications must adhere to the following guidelines. Altering margins or fonts in order to circumvent page limits will affect grading of the proposal. Font

Use an Arial, Helvetica, Palatino Linotype, or Georgia typeface, a black font color, and a font size of 11 points or larger. (A Symbol font may be used to insert Greek letters or special characters; the font size requirement still applies.)

Type density, including characters and spaces, must be no more than 15

characters per inch. Type may be no more than six lines per inch.

Paper Size and Page Margins

Use standard paper size (8 ½" x 11).

Use at least one-half inch margins (top, bottom, left, and right) for all pages. No information should appear in the margins, including the PI’s name and page numbers.

Page Formatting

Since a number of reviewers will be reviewing applications as an electronic document and not a paper version, applicants are strongly encouraged to use only a standard, single-column format for the text. Avoid using a two-column format since it can cause difficulties when reviewing the document electronically.

Do not include any information in a header or footer of the attachments.

Figures, Graphs, Diagrams, Charts, Tables, Figure Legends, and Footnotes

You may use a smaller type size but it must be in a black font color, readily legible, and follow the font typeface requirement. Color can be used in figures; however, all text must be in a black font color, clear and legible.

Grantsmanship

Use English and avoid jargon.

If terms are not universally known, spell out the term the first time it is used and note the appropriate abbreviation in parentheses. The abbreviation may be used thereafter.

Page Limits

The total number of pages for all applications will be the same, but the relative number of pages dedicated to each component of the proposal will vary between individual proposals..


1. Specific Aims

State concisely the goals of the proposed research and summarize the expected outcome(s), including the impact that the results of the proposed research will exert on the research field(s) involved.

List succinctly the specific objectives of the research proposed, e.g., to test a stated hypothesis, create a novel design, solve a specific problem, challenge an existing paradigm or clinical practice, address a critical barrier to progress in the field, or develop new technology.

Specific Aims are limited to one page.

2. Research Strategy

Organize the Research Strategy in the specified order using the instructions provided below. Start each section with the appropriate section heading— Significance, Innovation, Approach. Cite published experimental details in the Research Strategy section and provide the full reference in the Bibliography and References Cited section. Research Strategy is limited to six pages.

(a) Significance

• Explain the importance of the problem or critical barrier to progress in the field that the proposed project addresses.

• Explain how the proposed project will improve scientific knowledge, technical capability, and/or clinical practice in one or more broad fields.

• Describe how the concepts, methods, technologies, treatments, services, or preventative interventions that drive this field will be changed if the proposed aims are achieved.

(b) Approach

• Describe the overall strategy, methodology, and analyses to be used to accomplish the specific aims of the project. Include how the data will be collected, analyzed, and interpreted as well as any resource sharing plans as appropriate.

• Discuss potential problems, alternative strategies, and benchmarks for success anticipated to achieve the aims.

• If the project is in the early stages of development, describe any strategy to establish feasibility, and address the management of any high risk aspects of the proposed work.

• Point out any procedures, situations, or materials that may be hazardous to personnel and precautions to be exercised.

• Include any courses that you plan to take to support the research training experience.


Field Name

Instructions

If an applicant has multiple Specific Aims, then the applicant may address Significance, and Approach for each Specific Aim individually, or may address Significance and Approach for all of the Specific Aims collectively. As applicable, also include the following information as part of the Research Strategy, keeping within the sections listed above: Significance and Approach. Preliminary Studies for New Applications. Include information on preliminary studies, if any. Discuss the applicant's preliminary studies, data and/or experience pertinent to this application. When applicable, provide a succinct account of published and unpublished results, indicating progress toward their achievement. A list of publications, manuscripts accepted for publication, patents, and other printed materials should be included in the appendix.

3. References References should be listed in a separate section that does not contribute to the overall page limits set for the application.

4. Vertebrate Animals

If Vertebrate Animals are involved in the project, address each of the five points below. This section should be a concise, complete description of the animals and proposed procedures. While additional details may be included in the Research Strategy, the responses to the five required points below must be cohesive and include sufficient detail to allow evaluation by reviewers . The five points are as follows: 1. Provide a detailed description of the proposed use of the animals in the work outlined in the “Research Strategy” section. Identify the species, strains, ages, sex,and numbers of animals to be used in the proposed work.

2. Justify the use of animals, the choice of species, and the numbers to be used. If animals are in short supply, costly, or to be used in large numbers, provide an additional rationale for their selection and numbers.

3. Provide information on the veterinary care of the animals involved.

4. Describe the procedures for ensuring that discomfort, distress, pain, and injury will be limited to that which is unavoidable in the conduct of scientifically sound research. Describe the use of analgesic, anesthetic, and tranquilizing drugs and/or comfortable restraining devices, where appropriate, to minimize discomfort, distress, pain, and injury.

5. Describe any method of euthanasia to be used and the reasons for its selection. State whether this method is consistent with the recommendations of the Panel on Euthanasia of the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines on Euthanasia. If not, present a justification for not following the recommendations.


Field Name

Instructions

E. Appendix

Only one copy of appendix material should be included.

A maximum of 10 PDF attachments is allowed in the Appendix. Grants.gov defaults to a maximum of 10 separate attachments.

Do not use the Appendix to circumvent the page limitations of the Research Strategy section of the Research Training Plan.

A summary sheet listing all of the items included in the appendix is also encouraged but not required. When including a summary sheet, it should be included in the first appendix attachment.

• Publications –Fellowship applicants may submit up to 3 of the following types of publications:

o Manuscripts and/or abstracts accepted for publication but not yet published.

o Manuscripts and/or abstracts published.

o Poster/Oral presentations directly relevant to the project.

Do not include unpublished theses, or abstracts/manuscripts submitted (but not yet accepted) for publication.

• Letters from collaborators expressing their interest in helping your project by providing either reagents or expertise.

Additional Proposal Writing Resources:

Grant Writing Tips and Sample applications

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/grant_tips.htm

http://grants.nih. gov/grants/grants_process.htm

Grants Information

http://grants.nih.gov/grants/giwelcome.htm

Email: [email protected] Telephone: (301) 435-0714; (301) 451-5936 (TTY)

Grants.gov User Guide

The Grants.gov User Guide is a comprehensive reference to information about Grants.gov. http://www.grants.gov/assets/ApplicantUserGuide.pdf.

Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare (OLAW)

http://olaw.nih.gov

Information about animal welfare policy requirements, Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC), and Animal Welfare Assurances

Telephone: (301) 496-7163

Version 12-16-2010

Comprehensive Examination

Pre-Approval Form

Doctor of Philosophy Degree

For students who entered BEFORE Fall 2009 – The major advisor should ask that the Dean appoint a

representative at least two weeks before beginning the formation of the exam. The examination along with this completed

form must be submitted by the Department Chair to the SGS Dean for approval prior to the exam. After approval by the

SGS dean, the information regarding the administration and grading of the exam must be provided in writing to the student

by the major advisor before the examination is administered.

For students entering Fall 2009 or after- The Graduate Program Director is responsible for oversight of the

graduate program’s Comprehensive Examinations. The Comprehensive Examination Committee or student’s Advisory

Committee will work with the student’s Major Advisor to create the student’s Comprehensive Exam. This completed form

along with the exam must be submitted through the examination committee chair and the Department Chair to the SGS

dean for approval prior to the exam. After approval by the SGS dean, the information regarding the administration and

grading of the exam must be provided in writing to the student by the chair of the Comprehensive Examination Committee

(Graduate Program Director - or designee approved by dean) before the examination is administered.

For additional details see Graduate Student Guide located at http://www.mcg.edu/gradstudies/students.htm

General Information

Student’s Name

Student’s MCG

Matriculation Date:

Semester: **SELECT ONE**

Year:

= first semester student enrolled in Biomedical Science

PhD program

Graduate Program

Graduate Program Director

Advisor’s Name

Dean’s Representative Required only for students who entered BEFORE Fall 2009

Examination Committee

Chair

= advisor for students who entered BEFORE Fall 2009 OR

program director or dean approved designee for

students who entered Fall 2009 or after

Committee Members

http://www.mcg.edu/gradstudies/documents/PhDGuide.pdf

http://www.mcg.edu/gradstudies/students.htm

Version 12-16-2010

Administration of the Examination

Date- (Day 1 of exam) (must use M/D/YYYY format)

Date- (Day 2 of exam) (must use M/D/YYYY format)

Time of Exam Start Conclude Start Conclude

Location of Exam Name of Exam Proctor

Exam Format options

ONLY for students

entering BEFORE Fall

2009

Written test- one full day

Written test- two half days

2/3 written exam + 2 hour oral exam as substitute for 1/3 of the written exam

Exam Format options

ONLY for students

entering Fall 2009 or

after

one-half day, written essay-question exam plus a two hour oral exam

An independently written research proposal plus a two-hour oral exam

Additional Information or Instructions (box will expand as needed for text):

Grading Format

Day 1 – student must answer ** SELECT ONE ** out of ** SELECT ONE ** questions

Day 2 – student must answer ** SELECT ONE ** out of ** SELECT ONE ** questions

Special Instructions:

Grading Scale

Option #1

Each question will be assigned a score of +1/0/-1 +1 indicates an above average to exceptional answer 0 indicates an acceptable or adequate answer -1 indicates a below average or deficient answer

A cumulative score of is required for passing

Grading Scale

Option #2

0 - 100 Scale

Each question will be worth points

A cumulative score of is required for passing

Alternate Grading Scale

Describe and indicate score required for passing (box will expand as needed for text):

Additional information or instructions (box will expand as needed for text):

A final score will be reported to the student and the SGS no later than (indicate date in M/D/YYYY format)

Version 12-16-2010

Exam Questions – NOT to be provided to the student prior to exam ATTACH exam questions or type in space provided below- box will expand as needed for text

NOTE: The MCG Honor Code is to be in effect for the exam

Comprehensive Examination Doctor of Philosophy Degree

(Applicable to students entering Fall 2009 or after)

Name of Student: ___________________________________________________________________________ Graduate Program:_________________________________Year of Enrollment:____________________ Time, Date and Place of Examination: ___________________________________________________________ Examination Format: ________________________________________________________________________ (NOTE: Signatures below certify that the exam was conducted according to the procedures approved by CGS for this graduate program.) Results of Examination: ______________________________________________________________________

Pass or NOT Pass Remarks: __________________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________________ Typed Names and Signatures of Faculty Administering this Examination

Name Signature Date _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Examination Committee Chair _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Graduate Program Director _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Department Chair _____________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Dean, College of Graduate Studies A copy of the examination questions is filed in the office of the College of Graduate Studies along with the Comprehensive Exam Approval Form. The answers are kept in the departmental files.

Revised 2-7-2011

EVALUATION RUBRIC: Research Proposal Student’s Name: __________________________ Student’s Graduate Program: _______________________ Name of Individual Completing this rubric: ____________________________ Date: _____________________

Evaluation/Guidance

Poor

pr

ovid

e ex

plan

atio

n fo

r ea

ch se

lect

ed

Mar

gina

lly

Acce

ptab

le

Acce

ptab

le

Very

Goo

d

Exce

llent

Not

Ap

plic

able

1. Problem Definition-Hypothesis: Stated the research problem clearly, provided motivation for undertaking the research.

2. Specific Aims: Provided succinct, clear, logical description of the objectives and plan of action.

3.Background- Literature and Previous Work: Demonstrated sound knowledge of literature in the area, and of prior work on the specific research problem.

4. Significance - Impact of Proposed Research: (a) Demonstrated the potential value of solution or contribution to the research problem in advancing knowledge (a) within and (b) outside the area/field of study. (b)

5. Research and Design Methods - Solution Approach: Applied sound state-of-the-field research methods/tools to solve the defined problem and has described the methods/tools effectively.

6. Results – Preliminary Studies: Analyzed and interpreted research results/data effectively.

7. Quality of Written and Oral Communication: (a) Communicated research results and implications clearly and professionally in both (a) written and (b) oral form. (b)

8. Critical Thinking: Demonstrated capability for independent research in the area of study, significant expertise in the area, and ability to make original contributions to the field.

9. Broader Impact: Demonstrated awareness of broader implications of the concluded research. Broader impacts may include social, economic, technical, ethical, translational, clinical, pharmaceutical, technological or business aspects.

10. Publications and Presentations: Journal or conference publications or presentations have resulted from this or related research.

11. Optional - Program Specific Criteria (describe)

Overall Assessment: The assessment of the overall performance of the student based on the evidence provided in items 1 – 10 (or 11) above.

CRITERIA PERFORMANCE RATINGS

Research Proposal Unacceptable NOT approved

Research Proposal Acceptable APPROVED

OVERALL- My Rating of the Research Proposal: (select one)

Poor – provide explanation and/or suggestions

Marginally Acceptable

Acceptable Very Good Excellent

Revised 2-7-2011

Provide comments and/or suggestions:

Rev. 6-2010

Admission to Candidacy for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree

___________________________________________________ , a graduate student in the Department of Name of Student _______________________________________________________ has met requirements set forth in the Medical College of Georgia Catalog for Admission to Candidacy for the Doctor of Philosophy Degree. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Major Advisor Date ____________________________________________________________________________________ Department Chair Date (For PhD in Nursing obtain signature from SON Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) ____________________________________________________________________________________ Dean, School of Graduate Studies Date

Rev. 6-2010

Dissertation Approval Form Doctor of Philosophy Degree

TO: Members of the Advisory Committee for: ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Name of Student Graduate Program Your signature below indicates approval of the student’s dissertation research. Your approval at this point will not imply that there are no corrections that have to be made. Your approval will imply that there are no major alterations necessary in the investigations or in the body of the text; that the review of the literature is adequate; that the data adequately supports the conclusions; and that the quality and amount of work represented by the dissertation is, in general, consistent with the degree being sought by the student. A Final Oral Examination will not be scheduled until these criteria are met. Your approval at this point will have no bearing on the outcome of the Final Oral Examination. _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Major Advisor Signature Date Title of Dissertation:

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________

Sign your name in the space provided below if you feel that the dissertation is acceptable for the purpose of administering the Final Oral Examination. If you do not feel this is the case, inform the student of your criticisms so that they may be taken into account in the modifications. The student will then submit the modified manuscript to the committee.

Names of Committee Members (Other than Major Advisor)

Signature Date

_________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________

Rev. 6-2010

Faculty Agreement Form Date and Time of Final Oral Examination

Doctor of Philosophy Degree

I will be in attendance at the Final Oral Examination for: ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Name of Student Graduate Program ______________ _______________ ___________________________________________ Date Time Place Names of Advisory Committee and Readers Signatures ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Major Advisor ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ ___________________________________________

Rev. 6-2010

Dissertation Research Proposal Doctor of Philosophy Degree

Name of Student: _________________________________________________________________________ Graduate Program: _______________________________________________________________________ Proposed Title of Project: _________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ If you approve the attached Research Proposal, sign your name in the space indicated. The Major Advisor must indicate his/her approval before the student circulates this proposal to the other members of the Advisory Committee.

Name Signature Date

_________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Major Advisor _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Department Chair (For PhD in Nursing obtain signature from SON Associate Dean for Academic Affairs) _________________________________ ________________________________________ __________ Dean, School of Graduate Studies

A copy of the proposal must be submitted to the Dean with this form.

Student’s Name:________________________________ Student’s Graduate Program: _______________________________________

Rubric for Evaluating Ph.D. Dissertation and Defense (Final Oral Exam) Committee Members, Readers and Students are responsible for being aware of this evaluation rubric in advance of the defense.

(This page will be completed by CGS and a copy of the rubric will be distributed to the committee, readers and student just prior to the defense)

Major Advisor Name: _______________________________________ Date of Dissertation Defense ______________________

Dissertation Title ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

At the conclusion of the defense, each committee member and reader must complete the attached response sheets. For each attribute that a committee member feels is somewhat or very deficient, a short explanation should be provided. Confidential Comment sections at the bottom of the rubric are provided for explanations of the reasoning behind the overall evaluation of the examinee’s performance if desired. Completed forms are to be treated as confidential and are to be turned in to the Dean (or Dean’s designee), not to the student. All examination documents (rubrics and written comments) must be completed regardless of the outcome of the Dissertation Defense. A copy of the completed forms (both rubrics and written comments) must be sent to the School of Graduate Studies Dean (or Dean’s designee), within 48 h of the conclusion of the dissertation defense. A summary of written comments and overall evaluation from the committee members will be provided to the student, Major Advisor, and Graduate Program Director.

Advisory Committee Members

1

2

3

4

5

Dissertation Readers

1

2

Student’s Name:________________________________ Student’s Graduate Program: _______________________________________ Dissertation DEFENSE Rubric – Completed by: ___________________________________ Date : ________________

(To be completed by each committee member & reader. Please check each evaluation criteria that you feel are appropriate within each attribute category)

Attribute Does Not Meet Expectations Provide a short explanation for each attribute

that you select in this category.

Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations

Overall quality of presentation

Poorly organized

Poor presentation

Poor communication skills

Slides and handouts difficult to read

Clearly organized

Clear presentation

Good communication skills

Slides and handouts clear

Well organized

Professional presentation

Excellent communication skills

Slides and handouts outstanding

Overall breadth of knowledge

Presentation unacceptable

Presentation reveals critical weaknesses in depth of knowledge in subject matter

Presentation does not reflect well developed critical thinking skills

Presentation is narrow in scope

Presentation acceptable

Presentation reveals some depth of knowledge in subject matter

Presentation reveals above average critical thinking skills

Presentation reveals the ability to draw from knowledge in several disciplines

Presentation superior

Presentation reveals exceptional depth of subject knowledge

Presentation reveals well developed critical thinking skills

Presentation reveals the ability to interconnect and extend knowledge from multiple disciplines

Quality of response to questions

Responses are incomplete or require prompting

Arguments are poorly presented

Respondent exhibits lack of knowledge in subject area

Responses do not meet level expected of a Ph.D. graduate

Responses are complete

Arguments are well organized

Respondent exhibits adequate knowledge in subject area

Responses meet level expected of a Ph.D. graduate

Responses are eloquent

Arguments are skillfully presented

Respondent exhibits superior knowledge in subject area

Responses exceed level expected of a Ph.D. graduate

Overall Assessment

Does not meet expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations

Confidential Comments:

Student’s Name:________________________________ Student’s Graduate Program: _______________________________________ DISSERTATION Rubric – Completed by: ____________________________ Date: _____________________

(To be completed by each committee member & reader. Please check each evaluation criteria that you feel are appropriate within each attribute category)

Attribute Does Not Meet Expectations Provide a short explanation for each attribute

that you select in this category.

Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations

Overall quality of science

Arguments are incorrect, incoherent, or flawed

Objectives are poorly defined

Demonstrates rudimentary critical thinking skills

Does not reflect understanding of subject matter and associated literature

Demonstrates poor understanding of theoretical concepts

Demonstrates limited originality

Displays limited creativity and insight

Arguments are coherent and clear

Objectives are clear

Demonstrates average critical thinking skills

Reflects understanding of subject matter and associated literature

Demonstrates understanding of theoretical concepts

Demonstrates originality

Displays creativity and insight

Arguments are superior

Objectives are well defined

Exhibits mature, critical thinking skills

Exhibits mastery of subject matter and associated literature.

Demonstrates mastery of theoretical concepts

Demonstrates exceptional originality

Displays exceptional creativity and insight

Contribution to discipline

Limited evidence of discovery Limited expansion upon previous research Limited theoretical or applied significance Limited publication impact

Some evidence of discovery Builds upon previous research Reasonable theoretical or applied significance Reasonable publication impact

Exceptional evidence of discovery Greatly extends previous research

Exceptional theoretical or applied significance Exceptional publication impact

Quality of writing

Writing is weak

Numerous grammatical and spelling errors apparent

Organization is poor

Documentation is poor

Writing is adequate

Some grammatical and spelling errors apparent

Organization is logical

Documentation is adequate

Writing is publication quality

No grammatical or spelling errors apparent

Organization is excellent

Documentation is excellent

Overall Assessment

Does not meet expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations

Confidential Comments:

Rev. 6-2010

CHECKLIST FOR DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY REQUIREMENTS It is the responsibility of the student to keep this form up to date and to meet all requirements in a timely fashion. Some departments may have requirements in addition to those listed in this guide and checklist. Check your program’s handbook.

DATE PROCEDURE

______________ Program Entry Date (Semester/Year)

______________ Major Advisor selected (Deadline: End of 2nd semester of enrollment)

______________ Advisory Committee selected, approved by Chair and submitted to School of

Graduate Studies (Deadline: End of 5th semester of enrollment)

______________ Coursework Proposal approved and submitted to School of Graduate Studies

______________ Research Proposal approved and submitted to School of Graduate Studies

______________ Comprehensive Examination passed (Deadline for students entering Fall

2009 or later: End of 6th semester of enrollment)

______________ Admission to Candidacy (At least 2 semesters, but no more than 3 years

prior to Final Oral Examination)

______________ Advisor-approved draft of dissertation submitted to members of Advisory Committee (5 weeks before Final Oral Examination)

______________ ______________

Date of Final Oral Examination scheduled with School of Graduate Studies, Advisory Committee, and Readers (Scheduled 5 weeks in advance;

examination date must be at least 3 weeks before end of graduation semester) Faculty Agreement Form – Date and Time of Final Oral Examination Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies

______________ Application for Graduation submitted to School of Graduate Studies

______________ Corrected draft copy of Dissertation and signed Dissertation Approval Form submitted to School of Graduate Studies and Readers (2 weeks before Final

Oral Examination) ______________ Final Oral Examination Announcement Mailed (2 weeks before Final Oral

Exam)

______________ Final Oral Examination Passed

______________ Three Final Copies of Dissertation on Crane’s Thesis Paper and all completed final paperwork submitted to School of Graduate Studies (at least 2 weeks

before end of graduation semester)

cancer biology - augusta university and cancer biology (bcb) graduate handbook 2012 3 general...

Documents