Examples of Important Forms

Date (Month/Day/Year):

(Fall _________ or Spring _________)

The Preliminary Advisory Committee meeting should be held in the first semester of enrollment in the program, preferably in the first week. The goal of the PAC committee meeting is to decide on future course work and how the student will fulfill the research skills requirement, taking into account the student’s academic preparation and research interests.  Immediately following the meeting, the graduate student should fill out this form, obtain faculty mentor approval, and submit it to Ryan Zeigler (ryanzeigler@ku.edu), EEB Graduate Program Coordinator, as an e-mail attachment.

Student’s Name:

Mentor’s Name:

Committee Members.  List all members in attendance.

1. List planned courses (or recommended reading or tutorials), indicating tentative semester of enrollment and whether this course is recommended or required by the PAC committee.

2. Indicate how you intend to fulfill the Research Skills requirement.  List the particular skills and how they will be obtained.

Date:

Academic Year 20__/20__

Annual Research Advisory Committee meetings should be held sometime between December 1 and March 1 to discuss progress during the most recent calendar year and set goals for the upcoming calendar year.  Immediately following the meeting, the graduate student should fill out this form, obtain faculty mentor approval, and submit it to Ryan Zeigler (ryanzeigler@ku.edu), EEB Graduate Program Coordinator, as an e-mail attachment.

Student’s Name:

Mentor’s Name:

Committee Members:  List all members noting any that were not in attendance.

1. Briefly outline your primary academic and research goals for the forthcoming calendar year.  A bulleted list would be appropriate.

2. Review your progress towards academic and research goals that were set for the prior year. A bulleted list would be appropriate.

3. For students who have advanced to candidacy, list the date of the oral exam, and briefly outline your yearly academic and research goals until degree completion. 

4. How do those goals listed in #3 help (or hinder) your ultimate career goals?

5. If there were issues/problems that have slowed or hindered progress, please list these along with the committee’s solutions to improve progress towards degree.

In an effort to assess your progress in the EEB Graduate Program, graduate students are required to submit this form and an updated CV that documents your academic and research activities.  Ryan Zeigler, EEB Graduate Program Coordinator, will process your submission and share it with members of the Graduate Program Committee. For a more confidential consideration you may submit the form to the EEB Program Chair with an explanation of your concerns about sharing it with the members of the Graduate Program Committee. To use the latter option please ask the EEB Graduate Program Coordinator to email you the form.  Your candid responses will be held in strictest confidence.

Student Last Name:

Student First Name:

Mentor Last Name:

Names of Committee Members (Chair and other EEB tenured/tenure track faculty):

(Doctoral Students Only) Name of KU Graduate Studies Representative (formerly referred to as “external member”):

Name of non-KU committee members:

Attach an updated CV to accompany this form. The CV should include the following information (if applicable):

• Educational background
• Current academic status (i.e. M.A. student, Ph.D. student)
• Term you entered the program
• Presentations (local, regional, and national)
• Publications (submitted, in press, and published)
• Scholarships/Fellowships and Awards (include year awarded)
• Source of support listed by semester (GTA, GRA, other)
• Grant proposals submitted  (funded and declined)
• Professional Service (review publications and proposals etc.)
• Service on departmental committees
• Outreach activities

Based on your course work and research activities of the past year, provide a self-evaluation of progress toward your degree.

Did you receive a grade of LP (Little progress) or NP (No progress) while enrolled in dissertation credits during the year under review. If so, please explain.

Do you think that your major advisor’s (or advisors’) assessment(s) of your progress will differ substantially in any way from your own evaluation?  If so, how?

Please complete this form for each student you advise or co-advise. Your candid comments will be held in strictest confidence. If you prefer, you may submit the form to the EEB Program Chair with an explanation of your concerns about sharing it with members of the Graduate Program Committee. To use the latter option please ask the EEB Graduate Program Coordinator to email you the form.

Student’s Last Name:

Student’s First Name:

Mentor Name:

Based on your observation of the student’s academic and research activities of the past year, provide a thoughtful evaluation of the student’s progress.  Is the student motivated and focused?  Is the student working to his/her potential? Are there any weaknesses in the student’s performance that need to be addressed?

Do you think that the student’s self-assessment of his/her progress toward his/her degree will differ substantially in any way from your evaluation?  If so, how?

Each year the EEB Graduate Program Committee evaluates each graduate student in the department who has studied for at least one year in their current program using the information reported in progress report forms. Below is an example of the guidelines the committee uses to evaluate progress.

S = Satisfactory              SW = Satisfactory with warning               U = Unsatisfactory

Student Name:

Year being evaluated:

Ph.D. only – Progress in Research Skills & Responsible Scholarship (RS2)(Formerly “FLORS”):

S=completed in 2 years, SW=completed in 3 years, U=completed in 4 years

Ph.D. only – Progress of Oral Exam:

S=completed within 5th-6th semester, SW=completed in 7th semester, U=completed in 8th semester or later

M.A. only – Progress to degree completion:

S=degree completion expected in 2-3 years, U=degree competition expected in >3 years

Course work over year:

S=grades of A or B, U=one or more grades of C or lower, or one ore more Incompletes

Scientific Peer Reviewed Publications over year:

S=1 or more substantive manuscripts in press or published, SW=1 or more substantive manuscripts in preparation or submitted, U=no manuscripts in preparation

Scientific Research Grants & Proposals over year:

S=1 or more major grants submitted (e.g. NSF Dissertation Improvement Award, etc.) or 1 or more small, external grants (e.g. Sigma XI GIAR) received, SW=1 or more small grant proposals submitted, U=no grant proposals submitted

Scientific Research Grants & Proposals (Cummulative):

S=1 or more major grants submitted (e.g. NSF Dissertation Improvement Award, etc.) or 1 or more small, external grants (e.g. Sigma XI GIAR) received, SW=1 or more small grant proposals submitted, U=no grant proposals submitted

Scientific Presentations over year:

S=2 or more substantive presentations regionally or 1 substantive presentation at national/international meeting, SW=2 or more presentations locally or 1 at regional meeting, U=no presentations

Scientific Presentations (Cummulative):

S=2 or more substantive presentations regionally or 1 substantive presentation at national/international meeting, SW=2 or more presentations locally or 1 at regional meeting, U=no presentations

Students’ Evaluation of Annual Teaching:

S=excellent to good student evaluations, SW=satisfactory student evaluations, U=unsatisfactory student evaluations

Mentor Evaluation for year:

S=excellent to good progress, SW=satisfactory progress, U=unsatisfactory progress

Service:

Provide comments on the student’s service record. Note that service is not part of regular expectations for graduate students.

Overall evaluation (note that this is not simply an average of the above ratings):