Degree Requirements

Annual Screenings

Each year the PhD Committee shall review the performance of all students. Annual screenings will take into account grades, performance on the Scientific Core Course competency exams, participation in classes, research progress, progress towards satisfying degree requirements, the extent to which the student followed previous recommendations, and other matters relevant to professional development and advancement. 

The screening process will assess progress towards milestones in the PhD program, formally plan for the efficient completion of course work, and clarify research interests. These reviews can help students to evaluate their progress and goals, and identify opportunities as well as problems. In addition, the recommendation of the Committee to continuing students may include advice to pursue particular courses, internships, or research opportunities. 

Annual screenings will be done at the end of each year. Screenings will be carried out by the PhD Committee in conjunction with the Faculty Mentor. 

Students will be given one of the following four ratings based on their Annual screening:

(1) Acceptable performance
(2) Acceptable performance assuming certain actions are taken
(3) Unacceptable performance, or
(4) No report was provided by the student

Students receiving a (2, 3, or 4) will be put on probation and will have 6 months to make required changes. In this scoring system, a “2” could include a range of concerns from adequate lab performance but failure to meet milestones (e.g., late in taking the qualifying exam), to poor lab productivity with good coursework, to marginal coursework with adequate lab performance. Two consecutive semesters or three total semesters with a 2-3 may be sufficient for expulsion from the program. These measures are designed to ensure that the student, mentor, and Committee are all aware of any potential issues and that there is time to resolve problems before resorting to removal from the program.

Individual Development Plan

To facilitate annual screenings, all students will be required to complete and update their Individual Development Plan (IDP) each year for review by their primary mentor. First year students will complete the IDP twice: first, when they begin the program (by September 30), and then at the end of the Spring Semester (by April 30) in advance of their Annual Screening meeting with their primary mentor, which must occur before the end of the spring semester each year. The IDP includes a description of the student’s research and professional development plans and progress, details of presentations and manuscripts, and projected timeline for completing the degree. The IPD must also include any challenges the student may be facing. IDPs must be submitted to the primary mentor each year by April 30. For incoming first year students, an initial IDP is also due to the primary mentor by September 30 of the first year.

Timeline and Requirements for Annual Screenings

First Year Screening

By the time of the first year screening, the student should have completed an IDP, two required scientific core courses and the corresponding competency exams and formed their Empirical Project Committee. Students must provide the PhD Committee with: 

1. IDP (first year students complete this in both the Fall and Spring semesters; all other students complete this annually, in the Spring semester)
2. A transcript of courses taken and a graduate credit statement showing available transferred credits. (Students should verify shortly after admission that both documents are accurate.) Unofficial transcripts are available from the Transcript Office in JHH, or online in OASIS (Completed Course Summary)
3. Completion of a minimum of 16 units, including at least 2 of the 5 Core Scientific 
4. Competency exams in Core Scientific Courses
5. Completed Empirical Project form Section I

Second Year Screening

The second year screening process takes place after students have completed the Empirical Project. 

Students should prepare a file for the PhD Committee that consists of:

1. IDP
2. Completion of a minimum of 32 units.
3. Completion of all 5 Core Scientific Courses and Competency exams
4. Completed Empirical Project form Section II and III (Submitted to the Student Services Advisor in the Student Services Office by May 1).
5. Completed Appointment of Qualifying Exam Committee form (form obtained from the Graduate School and Submitted to Student Services Advisor in the Student Services Office by May 1).
6. Completed Request to take the PhD Qualifying Examinations form by May 31.

Note: Once the Student Services Advisor has received items 4 and 5, they will solicit the Request to Take the Qualifying Exam form from the student’s Faculty Mentor and the Chair of the PhD committee. It is up to the student to make sure the Student Services Advisor office has the required forms by May 31 to initiate this process.

Third Year Screening

By the 3rd year screening, students should have completed a minimum of 44 units of coursework. However, the majority of students will have completed all required coursework by the 3rd year screening. Students should prepare a file for the PhD Committee that consists of:

1. IDP
2. Completion of a minimum of 44 units
3. Completed Qualifying Exam form
4. Completed Appointment of Dissertation Committee form (form obtained from the Graduate School)

Annual Screenings Years 4+

Students should prepare a file for the PhD Committee that consists of:

1. IDP
2. Completion of 60 units of coursework
3. Annual Dissertation Progress Review

Curriculum

Petitions for Transfer Credit

Students with a Master’s degree, or significant prior graduate coursework in a Gerontology-related field, can petition to apply the credit toward this degree. Petition for credit will be based on the Graduate School’s policies and requirements for “transfer of credit’ and on approval by the PhD Committee. Transfer credits toward the PhD requirements will be limited to a maximum of 20 units and must have been taken within 10 years of completing the PhD program. The PhD Committee will evaluate each request for transfer credit on its own merits, and with particular regard to a student’s preparation for a research career in gerontology. 

The petition process is initiated by the student at the time of Admissions by completing the Transfer Credit / Reduced Course Load / Electives Petition form. Petitions involving transfer of courses taken elsewhere must be accompanied by a syllabus of the course and the name of the instructor, the university, when taken, and the grade received. 

Any foreign language syllabi/transcripts require the original versions and English translations. Students must first request for a Transfer Credit Report from the USC Registrar’s Office. See the link for specific details. Students may choose from the list of transferable courses in the report to petition for transfer credit towards the PhD in Gerontology degree. Such approval is necessary before it can be reviewed by the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology. 

Petitions must be submitted to the Student Service Advisor in the Student Services Office in the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology for consideration by the first year screening. Exceptions to this timeline can be made if the student is unable to obtain their petition materials in a timely fashion. However, any exceptions will also delay the transfer credit approval.

Students will be notified in writing of the Committee’s decision. If the petition is denied, the packet will be returned to the student. If the petition is approved, the request will be acted on in the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology, or may be forwarded to the Graduate School by the USC Leonard Davis School for final review by the appropriate Associate Dean. If approved there, a copy of the approved petition will be sent to the student and the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology. 

Suggestions for improving the chances of a positive decision include: discussing the request with the Faculty Mentor, presenting the form in typed format, being specific and reasonable about the requests, limiting the number of petitions submitted at any one time, and recognizing that the maximum units permitted from another university is 20. 

Students should ensure that a “graduate credit evaluation” is done in the University’s Degree Progress office before courses begin in their first semester.

Course Registration 

Registration for the fall semester begins as early as July for new students and in late March for returning students, and registration for the spring semester begins in late October. Registration continues until the Friday before classes begin, at which time tuition and all fees must be settled. It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that registration occurs on time; any late registration fees are the student’s sole responsibility. Students should consult the online schedule of classes for the latest information on courses. Copies of course syllabi for gerontology classes are kept in the USC Leonard Davis School office. 

New students are expected to attend a Graduate School orientation at which time a registration packet will be provided. New students are also required to attend the Gerontology orientation day. Returning students will receive updated information on the program as it becomes available. 

On the university website, students can register by selecting the Web Registration quick link at the bottom of the page. Registration instructions for the system are included in Appendix B. Courses that have a “D” after the five-digit class code in the schedule of classes require departmental clearance; those with an “R” are open registration. For classes taken outside of Gerontology requiring “D” clearance, students must obtain that clearance in the school or department offering the course. 

Course Requirements and Selection 

Students must complete a minimum of 60 units of course work (with at least 24 of these units being completed in residency at USC), as well as additional dissertation units (at least 4 units) as required. 

During the first three years of the program, the expected units to be completed per year is 16-24, based on faculty mentor or program administrator recommendations. Students who request an exception must have the Transfer Credit / Reduced Course Load / Electives Petition form signed by their Faculty Mentor and the PhD Committee chair. In general, the PhD Committee expects that the majority of units will be completed by the end of year three. 

The courses are organized into three areas: (1) Scientific Core courses, (2) Research Core courses, and (3) Electives. Coursework should be selected based on the student’s specialization (e.g., neuroscience of aging, psychology, sociology, biodemography, policy). To advance to candidacy, all coursework must be complete. 

Students should note that Gerontology courses at the 600 level are usually offered only every second year. Students are encouraged to review the course schedule to determine how to best complete these courses in a timely manner. Successful completion of the required course work and associated Scientific Core exams does not complete the educational experience of the student. Students are expected to enhance their exposure to research by attending the colloquium lecture series, working on research with a faculty member, presenting original research at the annual meeting of the Gerontological Society of America and other professional meetings, and by publishing original research in peer reviewed journals. 

(1) Scientific Core

The scientific core for the PhD in Gerontology stresses the physiological, psychological, sociological, neural, and policy dimensions of individual and population aging. 

Students must take each of the 5 scientific core courses. 

• GERO 610 The Aging Society
  • The interaction of demographic and economic processes, with emphasis on how the contemporary nature of these interactions influence public policy response to an aging population.
• GERO 613 Health, and Aging
  • Examination of changes in health related to age, changes in health in populations over time, and the key health issues facing older persons.
• GERO 619 Neuroscience of Aging
  • Overview of age-related changes in the brain and nervous system and how they relate to changes in cognition and emotion. This course will also cover how diseases such as Alzheimer’s and cardiovascular disease impact the aging brain.
• GERO 620 Psychology of Aging
  • Overview of topics in the psychology of aging. Includes research and theory bearing on cognitive, personality, adaptive, and social processes throughout the adult life span. Open only to doctoral students.
• GERO 645 Politics and Policy in an Aging Society
  • The course includes dynamics of the policy making process and the history and content of key policy areas relevant to aging (e.g., health, income, long-term services and supports).

Core Course Competency Exams

During the finals week of each Core Scientific Course, a competency exam will be given. Core Course Competency Exams are designed to test core knowledge across the content areas. Core knowledge is tested with a series of short-response questions based on a sample of the core competencies.  Responses are expected to be thorough but concise, and should generally be from one paragraph to a page long. Each area will determine the manner in which exams are given (in class, at home, open or closed book).

The exams will be subjected to a Turnitin/AI check report so students should take special care to make sure they are writing in their own words, even when citing source material.  They may not use generative AI like ChatGPT. 

Assessment: Responses to the questions assessing competencies are assessed by multiple faculty members within their core disciplines using the assessment rubric below

CRITERIA	PASS (3)	MARGINAL PASS (2)	FAIL  (1)	SCORE
Completeness	Shows a thorough understanding of the question. Addresses all aspects of the question completely.	Shows a limited understanding of the question. Does not adequately address the question.	Does not answer the specific question.
Analysis	Analyzes, evaluates, compares, and/or contrasts issues and evidence in a way that demonstrates depth of understanding.	Lacks analysis or evaluation of the issues and evidence beyond stating accurate, relevant facts.	Lacks analysis or evaluation of the issues and evidence beyond stating vague, irrelevant, and/or inaccurate information.
Evidence	Incorporates pertinent and detailed information from the research literature.	Includes relevant information, but lacks clarity of explanation or includes inaccurate information.	Does not incorporate relevant information from the research literature.
Writing	Presents all information clearly and concisely, in an organized manner.	Lacks focus, somewhat interfering with comprehension of response.	Organizational problems prevent comprehension.
				TOTAL SCORE:

Exams may not be retaken. Pass = 12-9, Marginal Pass=8-5, Fail = 4-1. Results for each exam will be recorded in the annual review.

(2) Research Core

A second core area focuses on development of research skills. For social scientists this includes research design, methods, and statistics. Students are required to take GERO 593, GERO 640 and GERO 655, and at least one additional statistics course generally from another department, on the student’s research focus. 

Students also are required to take at least two and no more than four semesters of GERO 592. 

• GERO 592 Multidisciplinary Research Seminar
  • A research seminar in which participants develop and present independent research as well as attend seminars from Gero faculty, post-docs, and outside researchers. Specific focus may vary across semesters. It is recommended that students take at least two semesters of Gero 592.
• GERO 593 Research Methods
  • An introduction to research methods and their application to gerontology including problem formation, research design, data collection, descriptive and analytical statistics, interpretation, and report preparation.
• GERO 640 Data Analysis Strategies
  • Hands-on experience in developing and testing hypotheses using various types of databases, data management and analysis strategies and written presentation of findings. Prerequisite: GERO 593
• GERO 655 Research Training Proposal Development in Gerontology
  • This course teaches predoctoral and postdoctoral students in interdisciplinary aging and health-related subfields to create impactful programmatic research, the training plans needed to develop their expertise, and the application “packaging” to obtain funding fellowship awards.

Elective Core

A third core involves electives which allow students to create a concentration in a particular area of focus or analytic field of inquiry. Students should select courses in consultation with their Faculty Mentor. Courses should be selected to provide in depth knowledge in the specialized area or general knowledge in the field of Gerontology. A number of Gerontology courses can be taken as electives. 

Suggested Electives or Research Courses from Other Departments 

Master’s level courses will not be accepted for elective credit. Students must verify both that the course will be accepted as elective credit by the PhD Committee, and that the administering department will allow registration in the course using the Transfer Credit/Reduced Course Load/Electives Petition form. Students should pursue courses in their area of interest in consultation with their Faculty Mentor. 

Coursework Evaluation Procedures

Grades

USC uses a traditional grading system for courses which includes the plus and minus: A = 4, A- = 3.7, B+ = 3.3, B = 3.0, B-=2.7, C+=2.3, C=2.0. A C grade is a minimum passing grade at the PhD level. PhD students must maintain a 3.0 GPA throughout their studies and for graduation. 

Incomplete Grades

A grade of incomplete (IN) is given only under unusual circumstances occurring at the end of a semester. It is not to be used for non-emergency situations. Course work must be completed and the IN changed to a letter grade within one year. 

If the IN is not completed within the designated time, the course is considered “lapsed,” the grade is changed to an “IX” and will be calculated into the grade point average as 0 points. Courses offered on a Credit/No Credit basis or taken on a Pass/No Pass basis for which a mark of Incomplete is assigned will be lapsed with a mark of NC or NP and will not be calculated into the grade point average.

Completing the IN within the one-year period should be the student’s highest priority. A student may petition the Committee on Academic Policies and Procedures (CAPP) for an extension of time for the completion of an IN. Extensions beyond the specified time limit are rarely approved if the student has enrolled in subsequent semesters.

In all cases, a petition for an extension of time to complete an IN must have departmental approval and include a statement from the instructor explaining what is needed to complete the course and why the instructor believes the student should be given additional time for completion.

If a student receives an incomplete, the instructor will fill out the Assignment of an Incomplete (IN) and Requirements for Completion form, which will specify the work remaining to be done, the procedures for its completion, the grade in the course to date and the weight to be assigned to the work remaining to be done when computing the final grade. 

Audited Courses

Students who wish to audit a course at USC must register for the course on Web Registration and select the Audit grade option. Audited courses will not receive credit and will not appear on the USC transcript or grade report. However, tuition is charged, and students should check with their school or program to determine if auditing courses is an option. As noted in the USC Student Handbook, attending a course without being officially registered in it is prohibited.

Requirement to Maintain Good Academic Standing

At no time should the overall GPA drop below 3.0. A minimum grade of C (2.0) is required in a course to receive graduate credit. Work graded C- or below is unacceptable for subject or unit credit toward any doctoral program. 

Students in the Gerontology PhD Program must achieve grades of 3.0 or higher (‘B’ or above) in the scientific core courses, GERO 593, GERO 640, and the research seminar GERO 592. Students must also receive passing grades in independent study, GERO 790. 

Full-Time Student Status

To be considered full-time, a doctoral student must be enrolled in at least six units of 500-level and above coursework each semester. Most students enroll in 12 units to make timely progress toward their degree; 16 units constitute the maximum load. Students wishing to carry more than 16 units must have prior permission from the degree-conferring unit; such permission will be granted only in exceptional circumstances.

There are two exceptions to this six-unit requirement:

1. A student who has completed all coursework for the doctoral degree will be considered full-time during the semester in which the student is preparing for the doctoral qualifying examination, provided the Appointment or Change of Qualifying Exam or Dissertation Committee form has been completed and submitted to the program and the student is enrolled in GRSC 800abz, Studies for the Qualifying Examination.
2. Doctoral students who have been advanced to candidacy, that is, who have completed all coursework and have passed the qualifying examination, will be considered full-time when enrolled in 794 Doctoral Dissertation. 

The Graduate School and financial aid policies determine that full-time PhD student status is six units of graduate credit (generally two classes). The USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology encourages students to enroll in 8-12 units (two-three classes, depending on research responsibilities in any given semester) in order to facilitate movement through the program within a reasonable time period. Continuous registration is required throughout the program. If a student fails to register for any (fall or spring) semester without prior approval, readmission to the program and the University is required. The University carefully monitors continuous registration. Students are expected to be full time students for the duration of the PhD program, wherein 50% of their time is spent doing research and 50% on their academic studies. 

Students who have completed all of the required courses must continue to register until completing all degree requirements. During the semester when the Qualifying Examination is taken, students may either register for a minimum of 6 units of coursework or GRSC 800, which is considered full time enrollment. Students registering for GRSC 800 will need to obtain clearance from the Graduate School. Once the Qualifying Exam is passed and the student is doing dissertation work, registration in GERO 794 is required in fall and spring semesters only, and is also considered full time enrollment. 

Enrollment Information for F-1 and J-1 International Students

F-1 and J-1 international students on student visas who are not enrolled in either GRSC 800abz or 794 must be enrolled in at least six units or receive authorization from the Office of International Services to enroll in fewer than the minimum units. International student with questions about their registration should consult the Office of International Services.

Immigration regulations require F-1 and J-1 student’s physical attendance for classes during each fall and spring semester of their program. If the summer term is the student’s first or last semester at USC, then physical attendance for classes is also required.

No more than one online class (up to 3 units) per semester can be counted towards the full course of study for an F-1 or J-1 student. If you only need to be registered in one course to complete your degree program during your final term, it must be in-person.

Summer Enrollment

Some programs require students to take summer courses, while others do not. Although students are not required to register for the summer session, most will find it advantageous to do so. Gerontology PhD students are expected to be conducting research and building their dissertation studies over the summers. It is, therefore, entirely appropriate to register for 3-6 units of GERO 790 – Directed Research during the summer session. Alternatively, students may wish to take a 3-4 unit academic course during the summer. Students may well find taxes taken out of your Research Assistantship stipend are lower if you do register for the summer session. Please note that this comment should not be construed as tax advice. The University encourages you to be mindful of your tax situation and to speak with a financial advisor as necessary, since neither the University nor the student services office is equipped to offer you tax counseling. If you do wish to register for GERO 790, or other USC courses for the summer term, contact the Leonard Davis School Student Services Advisor.

Empirical Project and Paper

Empirical Project Committee

In the Spring semester of the first year of study (e.g. the second semester of the program) students must form their empirical project Committee consisting of a committee chair (their Faculty Mentor) and one other internal member of the faculty who will subsequently serve on their Qualifying Exam Committee (“internal” is defined by the rules governing Qualifying Exam Committee appointments). While the full five-member Qualifying Exam Committee need not be fully formed at this time, the student needs to establish the participation of at least two members. 

In collaboration with the empirical project Committee, the student will develop a proposal for their research in the form of an extended 2-3 page abstract. Before the project can begin, the student must obtain the Empirical Project form, which has three sections, and distribute this to the two Committee members by Docusign. Committee members must complete Section I indicating (1) their willingness to serve on the student’s empirical project Committee, and (2) their approval of the research topic, purpose, and design as represented in the abstract. The Docusigned form with the title and abstract should be submitted by the student no later than the end of the second semester of study to the Student Services Advisor , the Chair of the PhD Committee and their Faculty Mentor. It is advised that the student begin developing ideas for the research and start reviewing literature as early as possible in the program.

Any variation to the timetable noted above must be approved in writing by the Chair of the PhD Committee. 

Empirical Project

During the second year in the program, the student must complete an empirical project that culminates by May 1st in a paper and a presentation. The requirement is meant to give students research and writing experience prior to commencing the dissertation. Evaluation of this project is based on the ability to: 

• Formulate (an) important research question(s) in the student’s relevant area of interest 
• Translate question(s) into an operational research design that is appropriately implemented 
• Analyze and interpret data in light of research question(s) 
• Write a research paper that successfully communicates findings to a professional audience and contributes knowledge to the field of gerontology 
• Present the core of the findings to an audience of interested professionals in a setting that invites critical commentary and response. 

The following procedures will apply to the development, submission, and evaluation of the empirical project requirement: 

(1) Conduct the Research

The research is mainly conducted and the manuscript prepared during the fourth semester and the summer (or winter break) prior to the fifth semester. As this is an iterative process, students will periodically consult with members of their empirical project Committee who will oversee progress. Frequency of meetings and level of supervision will be at the discretion of the Committee; however it is strongly advised that students remain in regular contact with the Committee in order to receive feedback on their research-to-date, guidance on research strategies, and comments on written drafts. 

Students are permitted to use data provided by a faculty member (including an empirical project Committee member), publicly available national datasets, or data derived from a larger project on which they are already working. However, the student should be the originator of the ideas and thematic elements of the paper, should be solely responsible for implementing and performing the analysis, and in all other ways qualify as primary author of the completed manuscript. 

The paper is designed to follow the format, content, and length of a professional peer-reviewed research journal article, though it may vary slightly based on your disciplinary background. It is important that the student reach an understanding with their Committee about the goals, direction, and feasibility of the research early in the development of the project. 

The paper should, at minimum, be of sufficient quality to be considered publishable in a peer-reviewed journal. While it is not a formal requirement to submit the paper for publication, students are strongly encouraged to do so after consulting with their Committee. You may build off of the empirical project for your dissertation with approval of your primary mentor, but the paper itself cannot be a chapter without substantial additions/modifications/extension.

As both members of the empirical project Committee must agree that the manuscript is of publishable quality. We encourage students to submit a draft of the paper to their primary mentor by the end of the fall semester. As stated previously, this may require several revisions before the manuscript is approved. 

(2) Submit the Paper to the Empirical Project Committee

When the final manuscript of the empirical project paper is approved, the student must send the Empirical Project Approval form to the two empirical project committee members via Docusign to sign Section II. The completed form should be submitted to the Student Services Advisor, the Chair of the PhD Committee and to the Faculty Mentor before the beginning of the fifth semester. The student will provide a copy of the approved manuscript to the Student Services Advisor to be kept on file. 

(3) Present the Findings

Students are required to make a presentation of the core findings of the empirical project to an audience of interested professionals in a setting that invites critical commentary and response. This requirement may be satisfied in several ways, including a first author paper or poster presentation at a professional meeting including the GSA meeting, a presentation at one of USC’s research centers or colloquia, or a presentation at another forum that the Committee deems appropriate for satisfying this requirement. 

The student should provide the chair of the Empirical Project Committee with the Empirical Project form via Docusign. The chair will note that this requirement has been satisfied by signing Section III. Once completed, the student will return the form to the Student Services Advisor in the Student Services Office, the PhD Committee and their Faculty Mentor by May 31st.

Any variation to the timetable noted above must be approved in writing by the Chair of the PhD Committee.

Qualifying Exams and Admission to Candidacy

The qualifying examination is designed to assess a student’s readiness to undertake independent research for their dissertation. It is comprehensive and, in most programs, includes both written and oral parts.

The Qualifying Exam is comprehensive in nature, partly written and partly oral, and designed to test whether the student has sufficient knowledge in the most central areas in gerontology and is ready to undertake independent, PhD-level research. It consists of two parts: (i) a written Dissertation Proposal written in the form of an R36 Graduate Fellowship application (details below), and (ii) an oral presentation and defense of the Dissertation Proposal. 

If not otherwise enrolled, a student must enroll in GRSC 800abz Studies for the Qualifying Examination during the semester in which they take the qualifying examination. Students are allowed to enroll in the GRSC 800abz courses a maximum of three times, first in GRSC 800a, followed by GRSC 800b, and, only if necessary, GRSC 800z. 

Because two semesters of preparation for the qualifying examination should be sufficient, students enrolling in GRSC 800z must obtain a D-clearance from the Graduate School. In addition, the student will receive a warning letter from their program outlining academic expectations and a path toward completing the PhD in a timely manner.

If the student’s written examination is satisfactory, the student may proceed to the oral portion of the exam. The student must complete the oral portion within 60 days of submitting the completed written portion to the qualifying exam committee. If additional material is to be covered in the oral portion, the committee should notify the student of the content expectations in advance. 

The Qualifying Exam (Quals) is composed of several steps outlined below. Key components are (1) the formulation of the Qualifying Exam Committee, (2) a Qualifying written Dissertation Proposal, and (3) an Oral Presentation and Defense of the Dissertation Proposal. 

Qualifying Exam Committee 

By the second semester of the second year in the program, students should have formed a Qualifying Exam Committee composed of five faculty members. The Chair of the Qualifying Exam Committee is the student’s Faculty Mentor. A minimum of three members must be full-time tenured or tenure track faculty from the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology (including the Chair). The other two members may be another faculty member from the student’s home program, an outside member from another program at USC, or an external member who is faculty at another institution. Members external to USC must be approved in advance by the PhD chair, the external member’s CV must be uploaded with the appointment of qualifying Committee form. The student should select members with concern for subject matter specialization, methodological expertise, and compatibility as well as have a professional profile demonstrating significant and measurable impact on the field of specialization (e.g., significant publication record and/or grant funding). The Appointment of Qualifying Exam Committee form to register the Qualifying Exam Committee must be obtained directly from the Graduate School, and should be completed with Docusign. Once completed, the student will return the form to the Student Academic Advisor, the PhD Committee and their Faculty Mentor by May 31st. 

Any variation to the timetable noted above must be approved in writing by the Chair of the PhD Committee. Changes to the qualifying exam committee must be made well in advance of the qualifying examination. 

The Qualifying Exam Committee is responsible for supervising the student’s program of studies, offering guidance concerning preparation for the Qualification Exam, and evaluating the written and oral parts of the exam. The Committee serves until the Qualification Exam has been passed, the dissertation topic approved, and the student is admitted into candidacy. 

Students are not permitted to submit the Request to Take the Qualifying Exam form until all requirements noted on the Empirical Project Form are fulfilled as indicated by signatures of relevant Committee members, and the completed form is properly submitted to the Student Services Office. This is the student’s responsibility.

Once the Empirical Project form and the Appointment of Qualifying Exam Committee forms have been received by the Student Services Advisor (by May 31), the student should send the Request to take Qualifying Exam Form to all necessary parties. The Qualifying Exam cannot be taken until this form has been completed. 

Written Qualifying Exam – The Dissertation Proposal 

The written Qualifying Exam should be distributed to the Qualifying Exam Committee no later than September of the 3rd Year. This is to allow enough time for any changes requested as well as completion of the Oral Presentation by the end of the Fall semester. We strongly encourage students to submit drafts of their Written proposals to their Faculty mentor well in advance, ideally no later than the Summer before Fall of the 3rd Year.

This part of the Qualifying Exam will be the written form of the student’s dissertation proposal, and should be formatted as an R36 Dissertation Fellowship. The required sections include:

• Project Narrative (three sentence max)
• Project Summary (30 lines max of text)
• Specific Aims (1 page)
• Research Strategy (including significance and approach; 6 pages)
  • The introduction to the project must present a mini-review of the field, corresponding to a shortened version of what will eventually inform the first chapter of the student’s dissertation.
• References

Inclusion of preliminary data is strongly encouraged.  In the absence of preliminary data, the student is expected to use relevant scientific literature as the scientific basis of each component of the proposal.

The formatting must follow current NIH requirements (eg, will be single spaced, 0.5” margins on all sides, black font, Arial, Helvetica, Palatino Linotype, or Georgia typeface in 11 pt, etc). Figures and tables are not to be counted towards the 6 pages of text. 

Students should take advantage of the USC Research Initiative and Infrastructure (https://rii.usc.edu) as well as the numerous websites devoted to detailing each aspect of the NIH grant application. 

Grading of the Written Qualifying Exam will be determined according to the following rubric (1 point each): 

• The proposal demonstrates critical thinking about the existing literature
• The proposal makes connections with the broader research context 
• The proposal has sufficient breadth to meet the spirit of the exam requirements
• The proposal demonstrates’ the student’s ability to synthesize across the literature
• The proposal demonstrates’ the student’s ability to identify existing gaps in the literature
• The proposal demonstrates the student’s understanding of the broader impacts of the research topic
• The proposal addresses an important problem
• Conducting this research will lead to new scientific knowledge
• The ideas within the proposal are innovative or novel
• There is a strong scientific premise for the proposal
• The proposal addresses the questions raised 
• The methodological approach is well-reasoned and appropriate for addressing the specific aims
• Potential problems and pitfalls are addressed
• The proposed analyses are described and appropriate 
• The proposal demonstrates clarity of arguing and writing 

Score out of 15 points (averaged across the Qualifying Exam Committee members) will determine one of three possible outcomes:

(F) Fail – no makeup permitted (<7), (R) Revise and resubmit (7-11), (P) Pass (>11)

Oral Qualifying Examination – The Dissertation Proposal Oral Presentation and Defense

The oral presentation (the dissertation proposal defense) must occur no more than 60 days after the written qualifying exam is distributed to the Qualifying Exam Committee, and no later than the last day of the Fall semester during the student’s 3rd year in the program. All members of the Qualifying Exam Committee must attend the oral presentation. As faculty schedules are busy, it is recommended that the oral defense meeting be scheduled as early as possible. The student is responsible for scheduling the meeting and arranging for a room for the oral exam with the five-member Qualifying Exam Committee. Once scheduled, the student must inform the Student Services Advisor of date of the oral Qualifying Exam. 

The Faculty Mentor will attend the oral exam and participate in discussions and final evaluation but is not permitted to answer questions on their students’ behalf during the exam. Mentors should largely be observers during the Oral Qualifying Examinations of their own students since they are perceived as potential advocates. Instead, they should allow the other Committee members ample opportunity to test the understanding and abilities of the candidate.

Students are expected to have extensive knowledge of the literature related to their project as well as the general literature in their subject area. They are also expected to have extensive understanding of the techniques used in the field, approaches and preliminary results. They are expected to be able to discuss their research plans in great detail, including a review of potential problems and alternative strategies.

The student should first present (via a slideshow) the results of the comprehensive, critical literature review untaken as part of the Written Qualifying Exam, including how past literature was synthesized and reviewed.

Then, the student should present their actual proposed dissertation research. This should begin with an overview of how the proposed research will add to current gaps in the literature before moving on to a detailed description of the research questions and hypotheses for each Aim. The presentation should include a detailed presentation of the proposed methodology and research materials (eg., samples, data sources, variables), empirical design, analysis plans (statistical method to be used), including a discussion of strengths and weaknesses thereof for each Aim, plans to obtain/harmonize existing data or received human subjects testing approval if required, a timeline for completion of each element of the proposal, and potential pitfalls and how these will be overcome. 

The candidate should demonstrate a mastery of core geroscience concepts and an appropriate scientific knowledge-base for the dissertation research project. The Committee should assess whether a general research capacity to advance to candidacy is warranted. In general, the oral examination uses powerpoint to assist the students in presenting material. The number of slides should be minimized so that the student can verbally demonstrate competency without reading directly from prepared material. 

The oral examination must be completed within 60 days of submission of the Written Qualifying Exam. 

Grading of the Oral Qualifying Exam will be determined according to the following rubric (1 point each): 

• Does the project address an important problem? 
• Would conducting this research lead to new scientific knowledge?
• Are the ideas innovative or novel? 
• Is there a strong scientific premise for the project?
• Does (or could) the proposed study address the questions raised? 
• Is the methodological approach well-reasoned and appropriate for addressing the specific aims?
• Is the proposal feasible?
• Are potential problems addressed?
• Are the proposed analyses described and appropriate? 
• Should the student advance to candidacy?

Score out of 10 points (averaged across the Qualifying Exam Committee members):

(F) Fail – no makeup permitted (<5), (R) revise and resubmit (5-7.5), (P) pass (>7.5):

Report on the PhD Qualifying Exam

On the morning of the exam, the student will obtain the Report on PhD Qualifying Exam form from the Student Services Advisor, to be signed by the Qualifying Exam Committee Members at the conclusion of the exam. The form must then be returned to the Student Services Advisor, the Chair of the PhD Committee and the student Faculty Mentor within 48 hours. Students may use an electronic signature program (Docusign preferred) to obtain signatures from members not physically present, including the Department Chair and Dean signatures. The Student Services Advisor may also assist students who are having difficulty in obtaining the necessary signatures on the form in order to submit the completed form to the USC Graduate School.

Upon the successful conclusion of the qualifying exam, the committee will certify on the Report on the PhD Qualifying Examination that: (1) the exam was appropriately rigorous; (2) the student’s performance on the exam was at the doctoral level; and (3) the entire qualifying examination process was fair and in keeping with USC’s academic and ethical standards. The Report on the PhD Qualifying Examination is available to graduate advisers on the Graduate School website in myGradSchool.

Outcomes of the Qualifying Exam

There are three possible results of a qualifying exam:

• Pass, and proceed to candidacy based on a favorable vote by a majority of committee members.

• Fail, with the option to retake either specific sections of the exam or the whole exam, at the discretion of a majority of the committee. The student should not be required to repeat parts of the qualifying examination passed on the first administration. The retaking of a failed qualifying examination or any portion of a qualifying exam must occur between one and six months from the date of the first examination. If not otherwise enrolled, the student must be enrolled in GRSC 800abz Studies for the Qualifying Examination in the term in which any portion of the exam is repeated.

• Fail, resulting in dismissal from the program. If a majority of the committee concludes that the written portion of the exam is so weak that the oral portion cannot compensate for it, the student does not proceed to the oral portion, and the exam is failed. The committee may provide the option of a retake, but is not required to do so. If a majority of the committee determines that a retake is not warranted, the student will be dismissed from the program.

A student may not take the comprehensive or qualifying examination more than twice and must be appropriately enrolled at USC during the semester in which any such examination is taken or retaken. A student who fails the qualifying examination a second time will be dismissed from the degree program at the end of the semester in which the second examination was taken. No exceptions are permitted.

Candidacy

Students enrolled in the Graduate School are officially admitted to candidacy for the PhD degree when they have completed the residency requirement and passed the PhD Quals. Admission to candidacy is dependent on submission of the Results of Quals form to the Student Services Advisor . The Graduate School informs students in writing whether or not they have been admitted to candidacy.

Dissertation

The culmination of the PhD program is the writing of a dissertation. A dissertation is an original contribution to knowledge in the field and a demonstration that the PhD candidate has sufficiently mastered the field to pursue independent research and scholarship. A dissertation represents the individual candidate’s research and writing.  The dissertation is to be prepared and written according to USC publication guidelines. The student must be enrolled in GERO 794 Doctoral Dissertation during fall and spring semesters after admission to candidacy until all degree requirements are completed. Registration during summer is not required, unless completing final dissertation requirements. 

Research involving human subjects needs to be approved before any research project can be undertaken. The University Park Institutional Review Board has the responsibility to the federal government to assure compliance for all research (faculty, staff, and student), which involves the use of human subjects. “Human subject” is defined as a living individual about whom an investigator conducting research obtains (a) data through intervention or interaction with the individual or (b) identifiable private information. (Secondary data analysis may require clearance.) Students are encouraged to obtain information on research involving human subjects from the Office of the Vice Provost for Research in ADM 300 (MC 4019). This publication provides information on how to go about obtaining approvals and must be done before the research is started. 

The student should consult the online dissertation guidelines of the USC Graduate School for dissertation guidelines, required forms and documents, and dissertation formatting instructions. 

Dissertation Committee 

The dissertation committee is appointed as soon as possible after the qualifying examination has been passed and a dissertation topic approved. The committee must be appointed at least one month before the dissertation defense. The Appointment or Change of Qualifying Exam or Dissertation Committee form, available on the Graduate School website, establishes the dissertation committee. The form requires the signatures of each committee member, the department chair or program director, and the dean or dean’s designee. The completed form is filed in the student’s home department or program, and a signed copy is provided to the student. A PhD student’s Faculty Mentor serves as the chair of the student’s Dissertation Committee. 

The Dissertation Committee can minimally consist of three (3) faculty members, but a full five (5) member Committee is preferred and is considered the norm in this program. Some schools and programs require “outside members,” and others do not. This Committee is distinct from the Qualifying Exam Committee but can have similar or even identical membership. The Dissertation Committee must consist of at least two faculty of the Leonard Davis School of Gerontology or majority gerontology faculty for committees with more than three members. In consultation with the Faculty Mentor, PhD students select two to four additional faculty as members of this Committee – again, a full five-member Committee is preferred and is considered the norm.  Committee members must have a professional profile demonstrating significant and measurable impact on the field of specialization (e.g., significant publication record and/or grant funding. Faculty should note that membership on a Dissertation Committee is a long-term commitment, typically 3-4 years, until the student graduates from the PhD program.  Students are REQUIRED to meet with their Committee at least annually to update them on their research progress, discuss technical challenges and plans to resolve them, and to present a timeline for degree completion.  Students must include the signed, annual Annual Dissertation Progress Review form with their annual screenings.

The form to report the formal Committee is available directly from the Graduate School, and must be submitted through the school office to the Graduate School. Students must submit the Appointment of Dissertation Committee form to the Student Services Advisor within 90 days after advancing to candidacy. Students must also keep a copy of the signed form since it will be required during the dissertation submission process.

General Notes

• Co-mentors count as one Dissertation Committee member total for the purposes of the previous guidelines but will still not have more than five total members;
• Faculty with actual or perceived conflicts of interest (COI) may not serve on the same Committee;
• Appointment of a faculty member from another academic unit at USC or an expert from an outside university, to encourage an interdisciplinary perspective, can be accommodated.  Be sure to review the current student handbook (School of Gerontology and the Graduate School) regarding the composition of the Committee.

The academic experience is greatly enhanced if faculty members other than the direct Faculty Mentor are readily and formally available for consultation and discussion with the graduate student. To provide this element of supervision, a Dissertation Committee should be put in place for the PhD student early in the dissertation stage, as soon after the Qualifying Examinations as possible, and be responsible for monitoring the progress of the student through the Dissertation Committee, as follows:

• It is required that the Dissertation Committee meet with the student, as an assembled Committee, at least once per year to assess the student’s progress in the program and to provide advice on future work.  After each meeting, the student should have the Annual Dissertation Progress Review form signed by each committee member.
• One-on-one meetings with individual faculty can also be useful (in addition to the required annual meeting of the group). 

A form that requires the signatures of all Committee members must be delivered to the USC Leonard Davis School Student Services Advisor Office following the meeting. 

At the end of a student’s fourth year in the program (before the Fall of the 5th year), the Dissertation Committee chair (the Faculty Mentor) MUST submit a written report to the PhD Committee, the recommendations of the Dissertation Committee, any observations of the student’s progress and potential obstacles, and most importantly a detailed plan, developed with the student for the completion of PhD studies. Note that this form is required for continued tuition and programmatic support beyond the fifth year.

Good research progress is also required to stay in the graduate program, and must be evaluated by the students’ Faculty Mentor and the Dissertation Committee at annual meetings to discuss progress. At least one meeting of a student’s Dissertation Committee must occur in each year following successful completion of the Qualifying exams and advancement to candidacy for the PhD degree. Students are responsible for arranging meetings of their Dissertation Committee to review research productivity and progress towards the PhD degree. Students must also ensure that the Annual Dissertation Progress Report form (see Student Forms) is completed by their mentor and Committee members each year and submitted to the Student Services Advisor no later than the end of the Spring semester. Failure to demonstrate satisfactory research progress, as evidenced by filing a satisfactory Annual Dissertation Progress Report form, may result in expulsion from the program.

Dissertation Defense

After passing all required courses and the qualifying examination, and after meeting all other requirements, the candidate must write and defend the dissertation. The doctoral dissertation must be an original contribution to scholarship or scientific knowledge. The dissertation defense assesses whether this standard has been met.

A student should consult regularly with their Dissertation Committee Chairperson (and possibly other Committee members) in conducting the research and preparing the manuscript and be prepared to write multiple drafts of the dissertation before the formal defense. The dissertation defense consists of a formal presentation by the student and a question/answer session and discussion with the Dissertation Committee to assess the written manuscript and the student’s ability to defend it. 

Upon notification that the Committee considers the dissertation ready to be defended, the student must orally defend the dissertation. The student is responsible for scheduling the meeting and arranging for a room. At least one month prior to the oral defense, written notification of the date, time, and place is to be submitted to the Graduate School. 

Students should follow Graduate School instruction and create a profile in the Thesis Center system. Students are recommended to create the Thesis profile the semester before they intend to graduate but no later than the beginning of the semester they intend to graduate in order to see and prepare for all the steps required to submit the dissertation. Beginning 24 hours before your defense, you may go to the Checklist page in Thesis Center to generate the electronic Approval to Submit form. Your action will prompt Thesis Center to send an email containing a link to the form to all of your dissertation Committee members. 

The candidate must defend the dissertation in such a manner as to determine to the unanimous satisfaction of the dissertation Committee that the candidate has attained the stage of scholarly advancement and power of investigation demanded by the University for final recommendation to the doctorate. While the oral examination is open to the general university community, only the members of the dissertation Committee shall have the authority to recommend acceptance of the dissertation, which must be unanimous. 

Final Approval of the Dissertation

After the dissertation defense has been completed, and the committee determines that no further edits or revisions are required of the dissertation manuscript, each member of the committee electronically certifies on the Approval to Submit Defended and Final Copy of Doctoral Dissertation that: (1) the defense was appropriately rigorous; (2) the student’s dissertation makes an original and substantial contribution to its field of study; and (3) the defense process was fair and in keeping with USC’s academic and ethical standards. This includes adherence to departmental formatting requirements. No changes can be made to the manuscript’s content after the Approval to Submit form is complete. The Approval to Submit form is electronically available through Thesis Center, the Graduate School’s online thesis and dissertation processing system.

 Dissertation Submission

Doctoral dissertation manuscripts must be submitted to the Thesis Center on the Graduate School website. At the time of submission, all manuscripts should be formatted and edited according to the style determined by the student’s department or program. Students have three months from the date the committee chair signs the electronic Approval to Submit form to complete any required formatting corrections in the Thesis Center. After the Graduate School has approved the dissertation manuscript, a copy is sent to the USC Libraries. All dissertations will be made available digitally via the USC Libraries.

Completing the Dissertation

The Graduate School provides a schedule for completing the dissertation on its website. Students must submit complete documentation and finish all corrections to the manuscript before the degree can be conferred. Upon completing all requirements, the official USC transcript will serve as evidence of the degree until the student receives their diploma.

Committees and Representatives

Empirical Project Committee 

The Empirical Project Committee is composed of your Faculty Mentor along with an internal core Gerontology faculty member (“internal” is defined by the rules governing guidance Committee appointments).

The second internal member should be someone who will serve on your Qualifying Exam Committee.

Qualifying Exam Committee

The Qualifying Exam Committee is composed of five (5) members. Two include the members of the Empirical Project Committee (including your Faculty Mentor). A minimum of three total members must be full-time faculty from the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology (including the Chair). The Chair of the Qualifying Exam Committee is the student’s Faculty Mentor.

Dissertation Committee

The Dissertation Committee can minimally consist of three (3) faculty members, but a full five (5) member Committee is preferred and is considered the norm in this program. The Chair of the Dissertation Committee is the student’s Faculty Mentor. This Committee is distinct from the Qualifying Exam Committee but can have similar or even identical membership. The Dissertation Committee must consist of at least two faculty of the Leonard Davis School of Gerontology. In consultation with the Faculty Mentor, PhD students select two to four additional faculty as members of this Committee – again, a full five-member Committee is preferred and is considered the norm. Co-mentors count as one Dissertation Committee member total for the purposes of the previous guidelines. Appointment of a faculty member from another academic unit at USC or an expert from an outside university, to encourage an interdisciplinary perspective, can be accommodated. Be sure to review the current student handbook (School of Gerontology and the Graduate School) regarding the composition of the Committee as you work with your student to build their Committee.

Student Services Advisor

The Student Services Advisor is Jennifer Lobato. Phone: (213) 740-0870. Email: jlobato@usc.edu.

Student Representatives

At the end of each academic year, students elect two representatives. The following are the responsibilities of the student representatives: 

• Solicit student input regarding the program to report to the PhD Committee Chair, inform students of any policy changes in the program, and generally serve as a liaison between the student body and the PhD Committee. 
• In consultation with the PhD Committee Chair, arrange GSA at Andrus, which is a practice session for students presenting at the November GSA meeting.

PhD Students Committee

• Solicit ideas for presentations from students and faculty.
  • Ensure that a variety of speakers from within and outside the department are scheduled to speak (a list of potential speakers and topics should be developed and added to each year).
• Notify students of the roundtable schedule.
  • Ensure that rooms are booked for presentations, that an overhead machine is brought for presenters who desire one, and that speakers (particularly those from outside the center) receive introductions. 
• Hold an election for the next year’s student representative at the end of each academic year.
  • Ensure that a meeting is held between the PhD Committee Chair and the students every academic year. 
• Monitor the “Gero PhD” website: ensure that the seminar schedule is posted, encourage faculty and students to post scholarship and career opportunities, and remove outdated material.
  • Compile and distribute a directory of Gerontology PhD students early in the fall (get file from outgoing student representative).
• Facilitate peer-to-peer mentoring of first year students.

Forms

PhD in Gerontology student forms can be found on the PhD Students page.