UTD has changed their PhD qualifying rules, reducing the number of required tests from “4 pass + 1 marginal” to “3 pass”. (marginal scores are eliminated altogether) This was my response:

To: Gopal Gupta
CC: Kang Zhang
Subject: Re: [ecs.cs.phd] [ecs.cs.ttfac] Transition rules (fwd)

Dr. Gupta,

With all due respect, I was shocked when I read these new qualifying rules. Nearly two years ago, when I decided to move to Texas to attend this university, one of the major selling points was UTD’s commitment to building this school into a tier 1 university. This change would appear to be the antithesis of this goal.

Nine years ago, when I was starting Virginia Tech’s undergraduate engineering program, it was a brutal experience. They made no bones about the fact that the program was tough, and that people would fail. They explained that the reason they pushed us so hard was that it was the only way to build a world-class program, and to force top students into realizing their potential. I heard again and again that not everyone is capable, and that continued failure is an important message that maybe you’re pursuing the wrong field. A lot of my fellow students complained, but in the end we respected the university and our professors, and were grateful.

Qualifying exams are supposed to be an equalizer in a program; to make sure that independent of advisors, professors, family connections, etc, all PhD students meet a minimum level of competency. And quite frankly, of the four quals I’ve already taken, when compared to the quals I’ve read and/or heard about at other top universities, they are not a high
bar. Five ~2-hour exams spread over a year and a half is exceptionally reasonable and achievable. I’ve watched my peers, and while many of them I like personally, of those who have failed multiple different quals… they match quite well the students I would be personally concerned about if this university wound up granting them a doctorate.

I also would like to ask: Was there a public comment period for this decision I was unaware of? If not, why? While this change does effect me positively in the short term (I have already met the qualifications under the new rules), I believe it to be a disservice in the long term, and a negative for the university as a whole. I understand the final decision should rest with the department faculty, but we all have a vested interest here. I for one would much rather see a smaller, higher quality student body than a larger one.

Overall I have been very happy with UTD, in both the quality of the professors I’ve had and the depth to which the courses are taught. I have learned vastly more here than in the previous six years of my professional career, and I am appreciative. But that being said, and while I do not believe this in-and-of itself to be a make-or-break issue, I am fearful of the larger message. I would strongly encourage you to please, if at all possible, reconsider this decision for future
semesters.

Thank you for your time,
Derek Anderson

P.S. I would like to note that this opinion is mine alone, and not necessarily that of my advisor or any of my professors. Furthermore, I was not encouraged to send it by anyone, nor did I discuss it or for that matter give anyone advance notice that I was considering doing so.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 27th, 2007 at 3:57 pm and is filed under college / phd / utd. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.