Faculty and Student Perspectives on Qualifying Exams: Conflicts and Opportunities for Progress

Written qualifying exams (QEs) have historically been an integral part of physics doctoral education. This is due, in part, to a unique expectation in physics programs that all physicists should share a set of fundamental, graduate-level content knowledge. Yet, in recent decades, many departments have opted to replace these exams with alternative assessment methods such as oral presentations and research proposals. We will present the results of a series of studies conducted in a physics department in the United States which still uses QEs, motivated by mutual frustration on the part of both faculty and students with the process. Through extensive interviews and surveys, we found that faculty were largely divided on the purpose and implementation of these exams, likely due to their wide variety of experiences in their doctoral programs. While students acknowledged that the need for some sort of matriculation assessment was necessary, they were frustrated by the opacity of the expectations and procedures for their QEs. The department is thus embarking on a long-term project to (1) develop consistent learning outcomes and competency standards for graduate coursework that are more consistent with real-world scientific decision-making, and (2) improve transparency and communication between faculty and students.