Cognitive Psychology Program: TRAINING AND COURSE Requirements
Important: This information does not contain paperwork procedures concerning, for example, admission to doctoral candidacy. The School of Arts and Sciences graduate dean's office governs these procedures. Consult the Arts and Sciences Bulletin.
1.0 General Goals and Philosophy of the Program
The purpose of the program is to train students in cognitive psychological research and teaching. The program provides training leading to the Ph.D in Psychology, preparing students for jobs in academic and nonacademic settings. Students are encouraged to complete the program in five years, though some students take longer due to additional coursework and the nature of their research projects.
As the highest academic degree conferred in recognition of scholarly and scientific expertise, a Ph.D. implies specialized expertise, broadly related knowledge, and a commitment to scholarly and scientific inquiry. The training philosophy of the program reflects these values within the apprenticeship model of training. Students work with faculty members, under close supervision, on research programs throughout their graduate careers. Over time, students acquire increasing independence in the pursuit of research. Within this model, the other two components--broad knowledge and commitment to inquiry--are promoted in an integrated program that includes basic course work, seminars, colloquia, and conferences. Students are expected to participate fully in the intellectual 1ife of the program and to take advantage of the many opportunities for learning in the broader university setting. Finally, connected to each of the three basic components of training is learning to communicate about one's expertise and about one's discipline knowledge. Student presentations of research promotes the first of these goals and teaching promotes the second of these goals. Teaching experience occurs informally, through mentorship of undergraduate student researchers and junior graduate students, and formally, through undergraduate instruction in classroom and instructional laboratory settings. Students receive support in developing their teaching skills through coursework, institutional resources, and faculty supervision.
The student's most important training is learning to carry out significant publishable research under the guidance of a primary advisor. The advisor will serve as advisor to the student, assists the student in learning the diverse skills of research, writing, presentations, etc. Although all students will work under the direct apprenticeship of a primary advisor, many students may find it useful to also collaborate with other members of the faculty.
2.0 Expectation of Graduate Students
The goal of the highly selective and careful admission process is to select students who can and will complete their degrees and continue to be productive contributors to the field, though some students may find that they are not suited for an academic career in cognitive psychology. Towards this end, students are expected to:
- Expeditiously and effectively complete the course requirements.
- Adhere to the recommended schedule for completing the first year project, Masters theses, comprehensive exam, and dissertation (see Section 6.0)
- Regularly submit papers for publications, including first authored papers in major refereed journals.
- Present papers at national and international meetings.
- Be active contributing members of both the cognitive program and the psychology department, including regularly attending “brown bags” and colloquia, volunteering for committees, assisting in new student recruitment, etc.
- Give a local research presentation, such as a brown bag talk or Pitt/CMU presentation every year (this expectation does not hold for first year students). Although presentations should be research oriented they need not be fully completed projects.
- Document their proficiency in teaching, by teaching (with satisfactory teaching ratings) at least one class during their graduate tenure. Most students however will probably engage in considerably more teaching.
3.0 Course Requirements
Course offerings reflect the central issues identifiable in cognitive psychology and related cognitive sciences. These include traditional topics such as learning, attention, language and memory presented in their most current formulations (but reflecting their historical development) by faculty active in research within these areas. Students in the cognitive program can elect to have a special concentration in cognitive neuroscience. Students with the cognitive neuroscience concentration are responsible for all of the requirements of the cognitive psychology degree, with the exception of the Psychology and Neuroscience Module. (Please see the cognitive neuroscience web page for information about the additional requirements of this concentration). The following courses represent the minimum requirements of the cognitive program:
3.1. Modules. The modules cover the basic content of cognitive psychology. Each module is a 3-credit, semester-long course. The modules, which are offered in alternate years, are:
a. Language
b. Perception and Attention
c. Memory
d. Reasoning & Complex Learning
e. Psychology and Neuroscience (not required for CNBC students)
3.2 Statistics. Two quantitative methods courses (6 credits) in quantitative methods that teach the general linear model and its associated procedures, i.e. analyses of variance and regression. Students are encouraged to complete the statistics requirement in their first year, though the specifics of course offerings may delay completion until the second year.
3.3 Seminars and Advanced Coursework. Students are required to take five seminars/advanced courses (15 credits) with the restrictions that:
(a) At least three of the courses should be seminars. The CNBC core courses do not satisfy this requirement.
(b) At least two of the courses should be on topics in cognitive psychology, and at least one of courses should be on a topic that is not in cognitive psychology (e.g., statistics, linguistics, neuroscience, etc.).
(c) At least two of the courses must include a significant writing component (e.g., term paper). These two courses should be taken for a letter grade.
(d) At least three of the courses must be taken for a letter grade.
Our goals are to increase the breadth of the students and to ensure that the students have an adequate number of opportunities to practice their formal writing. To this end, the students are encouraged to take at least one seminar per year during their graduate school careers, and the faculty should indicate a strong willingness to have students audit their courses. Also, students can request that an instructor supervise or substitute a writing assignment if it is not part of a course.
3.4 Teaching in Psychology. All students are required to successfully complete the departmentally-sponsored course on teaching in psychology (PSY2970), or the University-sponsored course on Faculty Development. This requirement should be completed either before or concurrently with a student’s initial teaching experience.
3.5 Alternative Mechanisms. In rare instances, a student may petition (with the support of their primary advisor) the Cognitive Faculty to have one or more of the course requirements be waived or fulfilled through alternative coursework. Such requests are granted rarely, and reflect either training that occurred prior to entering our Cognitive Program, or unusual circumstances during training (e.g., relocation of an advisor and student to another university).
3.6 Satisfactory Performance. Students must obtain a B in all required courses, with the exception of two seminars for which an S grade is adequate. Students who receive a B- or below will have to re-take the course or demonstrate competency with the course material via an alternative mechanism decided upon by the original course instructor and the Program Chair.
4.0 Research Requirements
The following are the specific research requirements necessary for earning a Ph.D. in cognitive psychology. Successful graduate students will typically supplement these requirements with additional research, writing and collaborations. Successful graduate students will also typically seek to publish the outcomes of their research.
4.1 First Year Research Project. During the first two terms, the student works on a research project under the supervision of the advisor. Typically the first year project will largely or entirely involve working on an ongoing project in the advisor’s laboratory. Students will present the results of their first year project as part of a “brown bag” at the beginning of their second year. The First Year Research Project is intended to get the student fully engaged in a research environment early in the training program; it often forms the basis for the Masters Thesis Equivalency (4.2).
4.2 Masters Thesis Equivalency. By the end of their second year, students are expected to have proposed, and ideally to have completed, a Masters Thesis Equivalency in Psychology. The Masters Thesis Equivalency gives the student an initial exposure to the steps that are required to design, implement, and publish a research project. Successful completion of this milestone typically indicates that the student has the skills to progress towards greater research independence.
4.2.1 Masters Thesis Proposal. Typically, during the first year the student obtains approval from his or her advisor to form a Masters thesis committee of at least three members. The committee is chaired by the student’s primary advisor, and must include at least one other member of the cognitive program. Committee members do not have to be part of the graduate faculty, but they must have a faculty appointment.
The student should distribute a written proposal for a Masters research project to their Masters committee, and schedule a meeting to be held 1-2 weeks later. Proposals should range from five to ten pages, including a literature review, proposed methods, planned analyses, expected outcome, and significance of the research. The proposed research should have original contributions, although often Masters Thesis projects may closely align with research projects established by the student’s advisor. Typically, the proposal derives from work completed at part of the First Year Research Project.
Ideally, the intended work is proposed as soon as a solid empirical objective and paradigm has been developed, but prior to the acquisition of data. In some cases, a student may have made substantial progress on data acquisition or even data analysis; this most often occurs when progress on the first year project has been more rapid or productive than anticipated. Such progress does not preclude the student from proposing the work, though Masters committees are not obligated to accept the proposed project.
The purpose of the proposal meeting is to evaluate the overall merit of the Masters research project, and to make recommendations for changes in the framing, design, analysis, and interpretation of the proposed research. The meeting typically begins with a brief (10-15 minute) oral summary of the proposed project by the student, followed by questions from the Masters committee members. At the end of this meeting, the Masters committee either approves the proposed research, or provides guidance concerning what steps might be taken to gain approval.
4.2.2 Masters Thesis Document. Ideally, the Masters Thesis research and write-up should be completed during the second year. The contents of a thesis should correspond to that found in an article in an empirical journal that publishes similar work. The expectation is that this document will serve as a foundation for a manuscript that can be submitted for publication following the succesful defense of the work.
4.2.3 Masters Defense. Copies of the Masters Thesis must be distributed to the committee two weeks before its defense. One week prior to the defense, the student asks members of the committee for approval of the defense schedule. Approval of a defense signifies the committee's opinion, based on a preliminary reading of the Masters thesis, that the defense should take place as scheduled. During the Masters Thesis defense, the student will typically present the work to the committee (the duration of this presentation should be discussed with the advisor). Following the presentation, the committee will ask the student extensive questions. Typically some revisions of the thesis will be required before a final version is approved.
4.2.4 Alternative Mechansisms. Some students may arrive in the program with a Masters thesis written in other programs. In rare instances, such a document might serve as an equivalent for a Masters Thesis. Students interested in this option should confer with their advisor about petitioning the Cognitive Program Faculty for an exemption to the Masters Thesis Milestone.
All students who enter the program without a Masters degree are expected to propose a Masters Thesis. In some cases, after a research project has been proposed, a student may find that other lines of research move forward more quickly. In this case, the student may request that a first-authored, empirical paper submitted to a peer-reviewed journal be considered in lieu of the work proposed for the Masters Thesis. The student should request such a change from their Masters committee, via a communication that includes a copy of the submitted work. The Masters committee then has one week to decide whether the student should proceed to a defense of the submitted paper, as described in section 4.2.3.
4.2.5 Terminal Masters. Satisfying the The Masters Equivalency Milestone is a demonstration that the student has the basic skills, intellectual capacity, and personal motivation that are necessary to successfully complete a Ph.D. dissertation. At the end of the Masters Defense, the Masters Committee will first decide whether to accept the Masters Equivalency as acceptable for a Masters Thesis. In rare cases, the Masters Committee may judge that the student’s overall progress in the program is not acceptable, even if they have successfully completed the requirements for a Masters degree. In this case, the Cognitive Program Faculty would as a whole determine whether the Masters degree should be a terminal degree for the student, or whether the student should be allowed to continue in the program.
4.2.6 Formal Recognition of a Masters Degree. Students interested in the formal award of a Masters degree must follow University procedures to properly format and submit an approved thesis document. (Check with the Graduate Office of the Department of Psychology for details). The receipt of the Masters degree is also contingent on completion of the core course requirements outlined above.
4.3 Specialty Exam. Following completion of the Masters Thesis Equivalency, the student is expected to continue his or her engagement in several research projects, while also moving the Masters work towards publication if possible. This work during the second and third years helps to define the specific interests of the student and allows the student to become an increasingly independent investigator. The Specialty Exam, typically completed at the end of the third year, gives the student the opportunity to critically examine the literature in his or her area of interest in order to develop a deep conceptual understanding of the theories and open research questions that will be relevant for his or her dissertation research. In addition, the exam serves a more general training function. Students need experiences that exemplify the kind of sustained, reflective, problem oriented scholarship that is consistent with their professional development goals. Writing a paper that might be published or submitted as a grant proposal serves this purpose.
The Specialty Exam also serves an evaluative function.It allows the faculty to assess the student's mastery of a specialized topic and to judge the student's preparedness for a dissertation. The student's comprehensive knowledge of relevant psychological topics will have been assessed in courses and seminars. In addition to this broad topical knowledge, the student needs to demonstrate his or her mastery of a specific set of related problems. This mastery implies an in-depth knowledge of a research literature. Passing the specialty exam demonstrates that the student knows the theories and research methods that have developed around a set of related problems and can articulate the central current issues that they address.
4.3.1 Format. The Specialty Exam consists of a scholarly paper written on the student's specialty problem. The paper can be envisioned as a review paper that is of publishable quality.. It should contain a critical, novel, coherent, and up-to-date review of a body of published papers in a focal area. A critical review is one that not only refers extensively to literature in some problem area, but also comments on the unsolved problems and methodological issues that have characterized the work on the problem. Such a paper also reflects a distinctive focus on the issues being reviewed. For example, it organizes the research in a useful way, posing particular questions, etc., rather than merely describing studies. Finally, the paper includes a substantial reference list. Seven to 10 pages (double space) of references would be typical for most papers.
4.3.2 Specialty Exam Proposal. The student chooses a specialty problem in consulation with his or her advisor. A two to four page prospectus describing the problems to be addressed in the paper is prepared along with a 3-5-page reference list. The reference list at this point is representative of the core literature to be reviewed rather than the complete list that will be part of the paper. The prospectus and the reference list together comprise the Specialty Exam Proposal. In addition, the student is encouraged to identify and be prepared to discuss two to three published review papers that will serve as models for the style and approach that the student will take in his or her own paper.
When the advisor approves the proposal, the student forms a Specialty Exam Committee comprised of three or more members. The committee is chaired by the student’s primary advisor, and must include at least one other member of the Cognitive Program. Committee members do not have to be part of the graduate faculty, but they must have a faculty appointment. The student sends committee members a copy of the proposal and schedules an initial meeting. During this meeting, the faculty present oral comments to the student concerning the proposal. These comments can help the student focus more clearly on the problems to be addressed and to suggest areas of review that should be added to the proposal. If the proposal is accepted, the student then formally begins the Speciality Exam (4.3.3). If the proposal is not accepted, the committee provides guidance concerning what steps might be take to gain approval.
4.3.3 Specialty Exam. The speciality exam typically consists of three phases: 1) a reading period, 2) an initial writing period, and 3) a revision period that culminates in a final draft of the Specialty Exam. The Specialty Exam Committee typically meets at the end of each phase to provide focused feedback to further develop the manuscript, and ultimately to evaluate the final product.
The Specialty Exam begins with a reading period, which is usually four weeks in duration. This time is spent largely in an absorb and synthesize mode where the student spends the bulk of his or her time readings the materials, jotting down key ideas and organizational schemas. Ultimately, the student drafts an outline for the Specialty Exam, and a 5-10 page summary of the key points they want to make. This outline and short summary is then distributed to the Specialty Exam Committee.
Following approval of the Specialty Exam outline and short summary, the student typically is given four weeks to write a draft of the Specialty Exam. This paper should be a best-effort paper of the quality one would be willing to send to a journal. (It is not to be considered a "rough" draft, but a polished paper.) The paper may not be publishable, but it should reflect competence in scholarship, including writing, and some mastery of the issues addressed. It is expected that improvements can be made in a revision, as usually happens when papers are submitted for publication. Following this initial writing period, the student should distribute the draft of the Specialty Exam paper to each committee member. The members of the Specialty Exam Committee are expected to provide both a written and oral critique of the document.
Following approval of the initial draft, the student is typically given two weeks in which to make revisions to the Specialty Exam paper. The revision typically includes a letter to the committee (modeled after a letter included with a resubmission of a publication) that details what revisions were made and how the committee’s suggestions were incorporated. At the end of the revision period, the final version of the Specialty Exam paper should be distributed and an oral exam should be scheduled. At the exam, the student is questioned about the problems addressed in the paper. The committee can be expected to probe the student's knowledge of issues and literature that are related to the topics covered in the paper, even when they are not actually discussed in the paper.
4.3.4 Boundaries. As a practical matter, there are some boundaries both on the paper length and duration of the exam process. The length of the paper shall not exceed 70 pages (double spaced) excluding references, except as agreed by the faculty committee in response to a request by the student. A typical length would be 45-55 pages plus references. (Note: These lengths assume large font (size 11 or 12) & conventional (1.5 inch) margins.)
Once a Specialty Exam proposal has been approved, the student ideally will require only 10 weeks of effort to complete the exam – i.e., the sum of a four week reading period, a four week initial writing period, and a two week revision period. This time frame excludes the time between the end of the reading, initial writing, and final revision periods that typically will be necessary for Speciality Exam Committee members to read and evaluate the student’s written material. Ideally, all of these meetings should be scheduled at the beginning of the Specialty Exam, with faculty given 3-10 days to evaluate the materials at each step. With these interim periods included, the Specialty Exam will typically extend across a 13-16 week interval.
The Specialty Exam committee has the authority to extend or modify the timing of the different phases of the Specialty Exam. For instance, a student may petition to have a four week reading period, a three week writing period, and a three week revision period. Or, a student may asked for the clock to “be stopped” for a short time during the Specialty Exam Period so that they can prepare for and attend a conference, engage in a short phase of intense data collection, etc. Additionally, it is possible that the faculty may not approve the student to progress from one phase to the next without further modifications to be completed within a specified time-frame. Such occurrences are expected to be rare, and the total amount of time given to the student to work on the Specialty Exam may not exceed 15 weeks, excluding the time required for faculty feedback.
4.3.5 Alternative Mechanisms During the course of training it is hoped that students will be successful in getting papers published in refereed journals. In recognition of the importance of this component of graduate training, students may substitute papers submitted for publication in lieu of a completing a Specialty Exam. One significant first author review article may be considered as equivalent for the Specialty Exam. In rarer instances, two or more first author empirical articles (each of which must be separate from work accepted as part of the Masters thesis) may also be considered a equivalent, especially if manuscripts include substantial and critical evaluation of the literature. To petition for such an equivalency, the student should submit the proposed equivalent work to their oversight committee for evaluation. If the Oversight Committee favors the petition, it will forward a recommendation to the Cognitive Program Faculty, which will be charged with reaching a final decision.
4.3.6 Passing and Failing. It is expected that most students who have progressed through the program beyond completion of the Masters Thesis milestone are able to successfully complete the Ph.D. program. However, it is possible to fail the Specialty Exam.. In such an event, the Speciality Exam Committee formulates a recommendation that is forwarded to the Cognitive Program Faculty. The program faculty as a whole determine the consequences of failing the Speciality Exam; potentially, a student can be given another opportunity to satisfy the requirement, or the student’s participation in the program may be discontinued.
4.3.7. Protocol. In addition to the procedures outlined above, there a few additional features of the Specialty Exam process that can be clarified:
4.3.7.1 Relation of the Paper to the Dissertation. There is no prohibition against the student drawing from the text of the Specialty Exam in writing the dissertation.
4.3.7.2 Faculty Role when the Student is Working on the Paper. It is expected that discussions with committee members as well as other faculty and students will occur while the student is working on the paper. Such discussions, which characterize the way scholarly writing proceeds generally, are presumably a useful part of the specialty paper process. The only prohibition of "help" is that faculty should not be asked for comments on drafts of the paper or parts of it prior to the paper's completion and distribution.
4.3.7.3 Duration of the Exam and its Relation to Other Activities. The exam is timed to take 13-16 weeks from the initial approval of the Speciality Exam Proposal to the final oral exam. This means that the ideal starting time is the beginning of the semester; the summer of the third year is viewed as an ideal time. The student must carry out substantial start-up work, e.g. writing the proposal, prior to the term in which the paper will be written. It is not necessary to follow this suggested timing, and indeed it would not always be practical to do so. However, it is expected that the student will continue to engage in other activities during the Specialty Exam, especially when the exam overlaps two terms. Taking a seminar, working on a research project, or teaching a course are examples of other activities that a student should perform while writing the specialty paper.
4.4 The Dissertation. The dissertation, typically proposed and completed during the fourth and fifth years, marks the end of the student’s apprenticeship. The dissertation must be an original project. Although the dissertation may, and often will, relate to the advisors research, it must represent a clearly distinct line of inquiry.
4.4.1 Proposal. The student, typically during the fourth year, obtains approval from his or her advisor to form a Dissertation Committee. The requirements for the committee are those of the University of Pittsburgh. The Dissertation Committee, chosen by the student and the advisor, consists of at least three graduate faculty from the Department of Psychology and one from the graduate faculty of another department of the University. (Note: not all faculty are graduate faculty. The student must determine the status of faculty before nominating them to the committee.)
The student should submit a written prospectus for a Dissertation research project to his or her Dissertation Committee. The prospectus should range from 20-30 pages, and include a literature review, proposed methods, planned analyses, expected outcomes, and significance of the research. The dissertation plan (prospectus) must be approved at a meeting of the committee, and a card indicating approval must be signed at the meeting. Following the meeting, the student must apply for Ph.D. candidacy to the FAS graduate dean's office.
4.4.2 Pre-defense Distribution of Dissertation. Two weeks before the defense of the dissertation, copies of the dissertation are distributed to the committee. One week prior to the defense, the student asks members of the committee for approval of the defense schedule. Approval of a defense signifies the committee's opinion, based on a preliminary reading of the dissertation, that the defense should take place as scheduled. Note: Seeking approval of the dissertation prior to the defense is very much in the interest of the student, as it dramatically helps to increase the probability that the defense will be successful.
4.4.3 Oral Examination (Defense). The final oral examination, at which the student defends the dissertation,, is open to the public. For the defense, the student shall arrange a large room, sufficient to accommodate attendance by persons not on the committee; the Martin Room in Sennott Square is strongly suggested. Announcements of the defense, which should state a title, a date, and a place, must be posted in prominent places in advance of the meeting. A copy of the announcement must be given to staff in the in the Psychology Graduate Office, who must post a notice in the University Times.
Students of the program are expected to attend the defense. The defense is scheduled for 3 hours and is divided into an open portion and a closed portion. The open portion is about 1.5 hours, beginning with a 40-50 minute lecture by the candidate and followed by an open question period in which all persons in attendance participate. The chairperson of the committee declares the open portion of the defense ended at his or her discretion. During the closed portion of the defense, only members of the graduate faculty are present; during this period, the student is questioned in depth about his or her research and relevant findings and theories within the literature.
4.4.4 Approval of the Dissertation. Approval of the dissertation itself occurs at the end of the defense. If revisions are required, conditional approval can be given at the end of the defense, along with the set of steps that will be required prior to the final approval of the dissertation. Once a dissertation has been approved, the student is encouraged to publish it electronically using the procedures established by the University. If the dissertation is not approved, the program faculty as a whole determine the consequences of failing; potentially, a student can be given another opportunity to satisfy the requirement, or the student’s participation in the program may be discontinued.
5.0 Teaching Requirement
It is expected that most students will go on to careers in academia that will involve teaching and research. To prepare students for this career, the program requires all students to teach at least one lecture-based course or to lead a laboratory section that requires substantial effort and instruction (e.g., a lab section for PSY0420: Human Cognition).
The first time a student has primary responsibility for a lecture course or a laboratory section he or she is required to have a faculty supervisor, who meets with the student to discuss the course syllabus, exam materials, etc. A student who wishes to take primary responsibility for a lecture based course is encouraged to consult with faculty about the possibility of “shadowing” a course, in which one section is taught during the day by a faculty member and a second section is taught in the late afternoon or evening by the student. Ideally, the student and faculty member would work together to prepare the materials for the class.
Teaching evaluations are required whenever a student has primary responsibility for a lecture course or laboratory section. Copies of these teaching evaluations should be submitted as part of a student’s annual self-report. A student’s oversight committee will review the student’s teaching performance to ensure that the student has adequate mastery of basic teaching skills. In the event that a student does not perform well in the classroom, additional teaching experience may be required.
6.0 Evaluation of Graduate Students
Students will be evaluated on the basis of the degree to which they successfully meet the expectations outlined above in a timely fashion.
6.1 Oversight Committee. Each student will be assigned an oversight committee of at least three faculty from the cognitive area. This committee advises the student concerning curriculum, and provides oversight to the student regarding his or her general progress in the program. This committee has the responsibility of providing the student a with realistic assessment of his or her performance, including putting the student on probation if appropropriate. In order to facilitate communication and to avoid potential conflicts of interest, the chair of this committee can not be the student's research advisor. Although there is likely to be overlap with committees associated with the Program Milestones, this committee is independent of all other committees.
6.2 Self-reports. Each spring each student must submit (electronically to the Program Chair) a self-report form that indicates relevant training activities, including papers written and presented, courses taken, skills acquired, etc. Each student should also include an updated Curriculum Vitae
6.3 Evaluations. First year students will have a fall and a mid-year meeting with their Oversight Committee to provide them with some early feedback on their progress, and to address any initial difficulties that may arisen before they become too serious.
Early each summer each student is expected to schedule a coaching meeting with his or her advisor to discuss his or her progress (students may want to use the advisor feedback form to help structure this meeting). In addition, each summer the Program Chair will schedule all students to meet with their Oversight Committees. Following these meetings, each student will receive a letter from the Program Chair, detailing the program’s assessment of his or her progress.
6.4 Timeline for Completing Program Milestones. Ideally each student should complete the program in 5 years, although it is understood that some students may require 6 years, and occasionally take even longer. Table 1 presents the recommended time frame for the completion of each of the major program milestone. If a student anticipates a delay in completing a milestone he or she must write the Program Chair explaining the extenuating circumstances leading to the delay, and the anticipated date on which the overdue milestone will be completed. In conference with the students’ Oversight Committee, the Program Chair will decide whether to grant an extension, or whether the student is to be put on probation. In either case, an acceptable time-line for progress through the remaining portion of the program will be developed. All students who exceed the maximum time for a milestone without contacting the Program Chair will automatically be put on probationary status.
Table 1: Recommended and Maximum Time Line
Year 1 |
Year 2 |
Year 3 |
Year 4 |
Year 5 |
Year 6 |
||
Sep |
Present First Year Project |
||||||
Oct |
|
||||||
Nov |
|||||||
Dec |
Complete Courses |
Complete Courses |
|||||
Jan |
Propose Masters |
Propose Dissertation |
Propose Dissertation |
||||
Feb |
|
||||||
Mar |
|||||||
Apr |
Complete Modules |
Complete Modules |
Complete teaching requirement |
Complete Dissertation |
Complete teaching requirement |
||
May |
Propose Masters |
|
Begin Specialty Exam |
Begin Specialty Exam |
|||
June |
|||||||
July |
|
||||||
Aug |
Defend Masters |
Defend Masters |
Complete Dissertation |
||||
Bold = Recommended time line Italics = Maximum time line
6.5 Program Probation Students who are making inadequate progress in the program as indicated by their failure to adequately meet the expectations of the program as detailed in sections 1.0-5.0 or failure to comply with the timeline for completing program milestones will be put on probation within the program.
Probationary status is determined by the program chair in concert with the student’s Oversight Committee, and in some cases the entire Cognitive Program. Students who have been put on probation will be re-evaluated at the end of each semester in order to determine whether probation status might be lifted or whether discontinuation in the program is warranted. It is expected that a student on probation will have a meeting with his or her Oversight Committee at the end of each term to discuss his or her status and plans. A student who has been given probation status is advised to have very explicit discussions with his or her Oversight Committee in order to be very clear about what will be required for them in order for probation to be lifted. A student who is on program probation for two semesters is likely to be put on University Probation status, which eliminates the potential for support. Students under probation status should also carefully consider whether their probation status may reflect a lack of commitment to the program, and thus whether they might be best served by pursuing other career options. It is important to remember that graduate school is not the best course for everyone, and recognizing an ill fit as soon as possible is in the best interest of everybody, and especially the student who would be better off pursuing an alternative career.
Once a student has been removed from probation, he or she will be expected to maintain appropriate progress towards the program training goals. In order to avoid penalizing the student repeatedly for a brief period of difficulty, the student’s oversight committee will be empowered to specify appropriate rates of progress using Table 2 as a broad guide. Specific expectations will vary from student to student, depending upon the circumstances and training milestone associated with the probationary status.
Table 2
Milestone |
Typical Target Time Between Milestones After Probationary Status |
Present 1st Yr Project |
1 Yr. from entering program |
Propose Masters |
9-18 months from entering program |
Complete Modules |
20-32 months from entering program |
Defend Masters |
8-16 months from proposing Masters |
Start Specialty Exam |
6-12 months from completing Masters |
Propose Dissertation |
4-8 months from proposing Specialty Exam |
Complete Dissertation |
12-24 months from proposing Dissertation |
6.6 Expected Success The program recognizes that completion of the program requirements involves a great deal of time and commitment on the part of every student. The Cognitive Program Faculty are dedicated to do everything we can to enable each student to succeed. All students have already undergone a highly rigorous selection process, as our goal is to complete the weeding out process prior to admission. Our faculty treat mentoring as a major responsibility and are genuinely dedicated to launching students on a successful career. We have graduated and successfully placed hundreds of students, and remain committed to ensuring that all students discover their potential in the exciting field of cognitive psychology