A core thesis committee, consisting of 3 faculty members must be selected by each student at the earliest opportunity, either in the second semester of the second year or in the first semester of the third year. The committee composition can be changed later.
The first meeting between the student and the core thesis committee should take place early in the first semester of the third year. Here the student will present their Year 2-to-3 summer research as well as their initial thesis research plans.
Subsequently, each student must meet periodically with their core thesis committee in closed session to discuss progress. These meetings will occur at least once per year, but could be more frequent. It is the student’s responsibility to arrange these closed session meetings at least once per year or more frequently if deemed necessary by student or the committee.
The purpose of these closed-session meetings is NOT for the student to provide a formal scientific presentation to the committee. An update on the student’s research progress is appropriate, but should not be the sole focus of this session. Rather, the goal of these meetings is for the committee to assess the student’s overall progress as a physicist. For example, one important role of the core thesis committee is to ensure that the student has a sufficiently broad knowledge of their subfield. The committee may choose to do this via a variety of procedures at their discretion. Questions on, and related to, the field and on physics in general will be a typical part of these sessions. In addition, the committee should assess the student’s professional progress, i.e. exposure to the literature and the work of other groups e.g. via conferences; opportunities to write and present their work orally; attendance at relevant seminars and/or classes; etc.
The ongoing monitoring of a student’s research progress through these meetings should diminish the chances of surprises at the thesis defense. Such monitoring can also provide a protection to both the student and advisor: First, if a student has sufficient material for a PhD, then the committee can push a reluctant advisor to agree to a thesis defense. Alternatively, if a student’s research performance is inadequate, the committee can support academic sanctions on the student, i.e. that the student is not in good academic standing.
After the closed-session meeting, the core thesis committee chair will prepare a brief report of the committee’s assessment of the student’s progress towards the thesis, and present this to the student and Departmental Registrar: Thesis Progress Report.
In addition to the private committee meetings, students will periodically give presentations (at least once per year) in a public forum, which the core thesis committee members are expected to attend and concerning which the core committee should provide written feedback to the student. Possible forums for such presentations include the Weak Interaction Discussion Group, The Monday Evening Seminar, the Sackler Discussion Group, collaboration presentations, group meeting presentations, etc. The format of the presentation should be a talk that lasts 30 minutes or more. The allowable format and content for the “public presentations” should be viewed broadly, subject only to the participation of the core thesis committee. Especially early on in their research career, to satisfy this requirement, it may be that it makes most sense for a student to make a journal club-type presentation in the context of a group meeting, later on progressing to a research-based presentation in one of the regularly scheduled series. It is also the student’s responsibility to arrange for this public presentation.
This public presentation is NOT meant to be merely a progress report for the core thesis committee, or an opportunity for the committee to ask physics questions about the work. Rather, the goal is primarily for the student to practice communicating in a public setting, and to receive feedback about how to improve their presentation abilities.
After the public presentation, the core thesis committee chair will prepare a brief report of the committee’s assessment of the student’s presentation, and present this to the student and Departmental Registrar. Once again, the focus of this report should be on presentation style rather than a comment on the scientific progress.