The dissertation is central to a graduate student's career and, therefore, of utmost importance for the design of graduate programs. Faculty members play a crucial role in guiding graduate students toward making their own original contributions to scholarship by completing the dissertation in partial fulfillment of the PhD degree. Supervision of the PhD is currently performed either by an individual faculty member or by a supervisory committee but, regardless of what arrangements are in place, the special bond that usually develops between student and principal faculty advisor invariably extends beyond the formal degree program and ideally leads to a lifetime professional, collegial, and personal relationship.

As students, departments, and faculty bear joint responsibility for the dissertation process, it is critical for departments to be involved in establishing and maintaining suitable and clear structures for the all-important student-faculty advising relationship. In addition, the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences has a clear role to play in indicating to departments advising models that have been shown to contribute to a better PhD experience for students. The charge of this ad hoc committee is to outline such successful advising structures, with the goal of having individual departments review their own policies and, where appropriate, make adjustments. These guiding principles, which can be modified to suit specific programs, recognize that there exists considerable variation across disciplines and departments.

Given the desirability of departments' clearly spelling out the expected time-to-degree in their field¹, it is important that adequate advising be provided to students from the time that they enter the program. This advising should cover subjects such as seeking interactions with a broad range of faculty, choosing faculty advisors, and selecting a topic. Students should be strongly encouraged to look at the overall time frame for completion of the degree from the outset. Additionally, it is important that all departments have a clear monitoring system to identify early in their career any students in academic danger.²

1. Preparatory Stage: seeking out advisors, finding an acceptable topic, preparing a prospectus or its equivalent, setting up a dissertation committee.

   While advising committees exist in the majority of departments, there are still several departments that retain the single-advisor model. Such a model concentrates considerable power and responsibility in the hands of one individual and is best avoided. Many departments already provide for a committee structure during this preparatory phase, building in safeguards against the danger of the student slipping between the cracks by interacting with several faculty advisors. The setting up of these committees should be seen as a joint responsibility of the student and the advisors. Students may also benefit from outside assistance which most appropriately should come from the Director of Graduate Studies or another faculty member designated in this role.

   Finding and defining a topic of realistic scope is an endeavor that requires input both from students and from faculty. Departments should ensure that students are encouraged to consult with as many faculty members as possible before making this choice.

   The timing of a dissertation prospectus or its equivalent varies greatly from department to department. Some departments have a set date by which all students must submit their prospectus. Others have a much looser approach, stating in writing that it should happen following completion of the general exams.³ It is highly advisable that departments require the submission of the prospectus, or its equivalent, as early as is feasible in their field.

   In most science departments there is no formal dissertation prospectus. Often it is included in a discussion during the qualifying exams. While there may not be the same need for a formal written proposal as in the other disciplines, science departments should still seriously consider requiring some written description of the proposed dissertation research.

   Departments that do not already have in place a thesis committee structure should be strongly encouraged to implement committees consisting of at least three advisors. Wherever possible, junior faculty members should be included in the advising process, since advising is part of the common intellectual enterprise of the faculty.⁴

   
   

2. Intermediate Stage: dissertation supervision, monitoring of satisfactory progress, dissertation colloquia, changing topics or advisors.

   Once a student has begun work on a dissertation there is a danger of the student becoming isolated, both socially and academically. It is therefore important that departments have in place mechanisms that require frequent contact between the dissertation writer and the thesis advisory committee. Several departments require students to present a written progress report to their committee at least once a year⁵. The committee examines the report, meets with the candidate either singly or as a group to discuss it and signals that the student is making satisfactory progress by signing the report. In the same manner, the student signs the report, indicating that s/he has been making progress and has clear plans for the future. Variants on this system exists where the student reports orally to the thesis advisory committee, but the formality of putting something in writing and signing off on it lends more weight to the enterprise and contributes to a greater sense of obligation on both sides.

   In the same vein, departments need to examine how they determine students' satisfactory progress and report this to the Graduate School each year. This review should be undertaken by all the department members in the case of small departments, or by a designated Committee on Higher Degrees, in medium to large departments. These evaluations should not simply be a rubber stamp, but should examine closely whether students are making the progress that they ought to be. The written progress reports can be of great value to the committee. If there is concern about a student's progress, the student should receive in writing a clear explanation of where the deficiencies are, with an indication of what is required to remedy the situation. In addition, the student should be provided with a definite timeline for meeting the requirements, and told what will happen if they remain unmet.

   Given that dissertation writing and supervision involve human interaction, there may be occasions when conflict arises between candidate and advisors. A committee structure means that there are others to whom the student can turn if this occurs. However, there may be times when the student needs the advice, or even the intervention, of someone removed from the immediate situation. Each department should therefore indicate very clearly that the Director of Graduate Studies or another designated senior faculty member is the student's first recourse in these issues. Beyond the department, the Graduate School also provides such advice through the Assistant Dean for Student Affairs, and it may be that it too can do a better job in informing students of this resource.

   In a further effort to keep their students engaged in a larger intellectual enterprise, some departments⁶ require students to take part in a regular colloquium once their prospectus has been submitted and they have begun their writing and research. These colloquia furnish students with a regular chance to converse with others in their field and oblige them to share their ideas with their peers on at least an annual basis. In the departments where they are in place, they receive strong support from students who argue that they help combat the sense of isolation and also provide them with valuable experience in presenting and defending their ideas.

   
   

3. Final Stage: dissertation defense, thesis acceptance, final cap

   Currently in the Graduate School there are more than ten departments that do not require a dissertation defense of their candidates. In these departments the advisor, or the thesis advisory committee, determines whether the dissertation is acceptable and signs off on the Thesis Acceptance Certificate. Students in those departments where the defense is lacking often complain about a sense of "unfinished business" at the end of the dissertation. Every department should therefore be urged to require some sort of culminating experience to the PhD, which could be in the form of a defense, a colloquium or a similar formal capstone.

   Some departments have stricter final caps on registration than those dictated by the Graduate School⁷. In an effort to spur students on to completion and to provide them with realistic targets, all departments should clearly specify in their departmental requirements their expected caps. These requirements are published annually in the GSAS Handbook and are therefore the standards of record by which students should be judged.

   On the matter of the Thesis Acceptance Certificate, the current faculty legislation requires that: "The thesis must be accepted and the Thesis Acceptance Certificate signed by at least two readers designated by the student's department, one of whom must be a member of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences." (GSAS Handbook 1998-99, p. 24, emphasis added) The acceptance of a PhD dissertation is one of the most important of tasks required of faculty and it is therefore highly desirable that more faculty be involved in this decision. We therefore propose a rewording of the FAS legislation so that it requires that: "The thesis must be accepted and the Thesis Acceptance Certificate signed by at least three readers approved by the student's department, two of whom must be members of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences."⁸ Such a change requires a vote of the full faculty, which will be proposed later this year.

• Students should begin receiving carefully considered advice as soon as they enter the program.
• Departments should provide a clear statement of the normal program length and normal thresholds within the program.
• A clear monitoring system should be in place from early on in a student's career.
• Committees for both the prospectus preparation and dissertation supervision are highly recommended.
• There should be some written prospectus, or its equivalent, in all departments.
• Departments should require submission of the prospectus, or its equivalent, as early as is feasible in their field.
• Students should be encouraged to involve junior faculty members on their thesis advisory committees.
• Departments should implement mechanisms for regular reporting of progress by candidate to committee.
• Departments should have in place a clear system of reviewing each student's satisfactory progress annually.
• Departments should develop and distribute explicit guidelines on how to seek help if the advising system breaks down.
• Departments should consider offering dissertation colloquia to provide students with a valuable means to maintain intellectual contact with colleagues.
• All departments should be encouraged to establish a dissertation defense, or its equivalent.
• Departments should publish clear final caps on registration.
• The number of signatures required on the Thesis Acceptance Certificate should be increased from two to three, with at least two of them being FAS faculty members.

December, 1998

Committee Members
David Blackbourn, Lawrence Buell, Henry Ehrenreich, Daniel Fisher, Cynthia Friend, Christie McDonald, Lisa Martin, Christoph Wolff. Staffed by Garth McCavana.

1. Time-to-degree will vary depending on the discipline, with optimal lengths running from five years in most of the sciences, to seven years in a few social science and humanities fields that require extensive language and/or field work.

2. For example, the Department of Romance Languages and Literatures requires all its students to take an exam at the end of their first year in the program. The exam is based on the courses the students have taken in the first year and must be passed to proceed beyond this year. The exam is also used by the department to determine whether students have lacunae in their knowledge that could be remedied by further work.

3. Current practice varies greatly from department to department: in some science departments it happens early in the second year, whereas in some humanities departments it is due by the middle of the fourth year.

4. Some departments, Government for instance, require that at least one member of the committee be a junior faculty member.

5. Some require that this happen each term.

6. Economics, History of Art and Architecture, and Music for instance.

7. The Division of Medical Sciences, for instance, has what it calls its G-7 rule, not allowing students to register beyond their seventh year.

8. Faculty members appointed to Degree Committees and holding affiliate status are authorized to sign Thesis Acceptance Forms.