PhD in Gerontology Program Information

This booklet is for currently enrolled Gerontology PhD students only. Future applicants should visit the USC Leonard Davis School Admission website for the latest program information.

PhD in Gerontology Program Information

Aging is a complex phenomenon that affects individuals, families, and society. As the global population continues to age, it is important for science and public policy to address the challenges and opportunities presented by an aging society. To support healthy aging, gerontologists need to have a comprehensive understanding of various influences on aging, which operate at multiple levels. Factors such as epigenetic changes, oxidative stress, inflammation, and metabolic dysregulation can contribute to age-related changes in the brain and other organs and tissues. Morphological changes that accompany both healthy and pathological aging are associated with changes in cognition. Lifestyle factors such as education, diet, financial resources, exercise, mental well being and social engagement can impact health outcomes in later life.

The social and environmental context in which people age is also critical, and gerontologists must consider public policies and societal factors including disparities in access to resources that can influence health outcomes. These include access to education, health care, caregiving, income security, and social programs. By understanding the complex interplay of factors that influence aging, gerontologists can lead the way towards developing interventions and policies that promote healthy aging and address health disparities.

The purpose of the PhD in Gerontology is to provide quality, multidisciplinary education in gerontology. The program is designed to train students to conduct high-quality basic and applied research and evidence-based analysis and produce the next generation of professionals in the field of gerontology. The PhD in gerontology provides: (1) an excellent multidisciplinary education in the basic fields most pertinent to gerontology, (2) an understanding of the social, psychological, and biological aspects of the individual aging process, and in-depth exposure to familial, social, psychological, economic and public policy conditions that affect older individuals and groups; (3) rigorous training in basic research design and methods; (4) opportunities to work closely with faculty mentors on research; (5) exposure to renowned international experts in our colloquium series on gerontological research; and (6) internships in policy or research which provide work experience in prominent organizations. Upon completion of the program, our graduates are expected to assume prominent roles in teaching, research, and administration, where they will make significant scholarly and professional contributions to the field of gerontology.

The program began in 1989 as the first doctoral degree program in gerontology. Since then, over 100 students have been awarded PhDs in Gerontology and 20 students are currently completing coursework or doing dissertation research. The select number of students accepted into the program allows an excellent opportunity to receive personal attention from faculty as well as benefit from collaboration with student-colleagues.

This is a dynamic program that cultivates experts in aging. The program is loosely structured in order to facilitate each student’s experience. Each student’s program will provide both a broad base of gerontological knowledge and areas of in-depth expertise. Students must be active participants in their education, seeking faculty guidance and opportunities. Whether or not a student succeeds is largely dependent on the student’s initiative.

Academic Advisement

Faculty Mentor

The Faculty Mentor will be a primary resource person for the student throughout the program and will aid in the student’s scientific and professional development by encouraging the pursuit of appropriate research, didactic, networking, professional and publishing opportunities. Because gerontology is a multidisciplinary field, recommended courses and research experiences may vary across students. Students should meet with their Faculty Mentor at the beginning of each semester to discuss course selection and general progress in the program. The student should also schedule regular meetings during the semester to discuss educational and research goals and facilitate individual development. Student success in the program is related to the relationship they develop with their Faculty Mentor. 

PhD Committee

Under the general oversight of the USC Leonard Davis School faculty, the PhD Committee is the governing body of the PhD program. The Committee consists of Dr. Teal Eich (Chair), Dr. Liz Zelinski and Dr. Jennifer Ailshire. Faculty outside the Committee are often consulted on issues relevant to their specific disciplinary expertise or area. 

The Committee is responsible for all aspects of the instructional program including curriculum review, admission recommendations, petitions, annual screenings, qualifying examinations, and academic standards. The Committee generally meets bi-monthly with an agenda established by the Chair. 

In addition to the Faculty Mentor, the PhD Chair is accessible as a general advisor for the PhD program. The PhD Chair meets with incoming students in the fall and can also meet with students individually by appointment to help plan their progress in the program, clarify what is expected of students, give advice on research opportunities, or discuss particular problems or issues. A record of courses completed by each student is kept by the USC Registrar, and an unofficial transcript can be obtained from OASIS at the USC website by viewing the STARS report. An official file is also maintained in the USC Leonard Davis School office, including all student records from admission to graduation. A copy of the PhD student advisement sheet is included in Appendix A. 

Student Services Advisor 

Student Services Advisor is in the Student Services Office take on a supportive role, assisting students with university policies, degree requirements, and tracking academic/graduation progress through the PhD program. They also process required paperwork submitted to the department or university, send announcements, deadlines, and reminders. The Student Services Advisors do not advise students in research or the mentoring of students through the PhD program.

Graduate School

The Graduate School provides all of the official forms necessary for documenting the doctoral degree progress; most are on the internet at the USC Graduate School website. All final approvals come from the Graduate School but only after recommendations from the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology. Any forms or documents going to the Graduate School should first be reviewed by the Student Services Advisor. It is the student’s responsibility to see that a copy of all such forms and correspondence from the Graduate School is included in the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology file.

Faculty and their Research

Comprised of some of the world’s most talented minds in gerontology, the USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology faculty is a group of intensely talented and passionate researchers and educators. Our faculty members include both the visionaries who pioneered the modern study of aging and the emerging leaders in the field who will shape the future of gerontology research, education, and service.

Gerontology Core Faculty

• Jennifer Ailshire, PhD, Professor of Gerontology, Sociology and Spatial Sciences
• Lauren Brown, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology
• Eileen Crimmins, PhD, AARP Chair in Gerontology and University Professor 
• Teal Eich, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology and Psychology
• Susan Enguidanos, PhD, MPH, Associate Professor of Gerontology 
• Francesca Falzarano, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology
• Andrei Irimia, PhD, Associate Professor of Gerontology, Biomedical Engineering and Neuroscience 
• Mireille Jacobson, PhD, Associate Professor of Gerontology
• Michelle Keller, PhD, MPH, Assistant Professor of Gerontology
• Mara Mather, PhD, Professor of Gerontology, Psychology, Biomedical Engineering and Neuroscience
• Daniel Nation, PhD, Professor of Gerontology
• Kathleen Wilber, PhD, Mary Pickford Foundation Professor of Gerontology; Professor of Health Services Administration 
• Elizabeth Zelinski, PhD, Rita and Edward Polusky Chair in Education and Aging; Professor of Gerontology and Psychology

Biology of Aging Core Faculty

• Berenice Benayoun, PhD, Associate Professor of Gerontology and Biological Sciences 
• Pinchas Cohen, MD, Dean, USC Leonard Davis School of Gerontology; William and Sylvia Kugel Dean’s Chair in Gerontology; Professor of Gerontology, Medicine and Biological Sciences
• Constanza Cortes, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology
• Sean Curran, PhD, Professor of Gerontology, Molecular and Computational Biology; Vice Dean/Dean of Faculty and Research
• Caleb Finch, PhD, ARCO/Keischnick Professor of the Neurobiology of Aging and University Professor
• Cristal Hill, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology
• Changhan David Lee, PhD, Associate Professor of Gerontology
• Valter Longo, PhD, Edna M. Jones Professor of Gerontology; Professor in Biological Sciences
• Christian Pike, PhD, Professor of Gerontology
• Ryo Sanabria, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology 
• Edward L. Schneider, MD, Professor of Gerontology, Medicine and Biological Sciences
• Marc Vermulst, PhD, Assistant Professor of Gerontology

Affiliated Faculty

As the hub for aging research at USC we also have jointly appointed faculty from USC departments of Economics, Medicine, Social Work, Psychology, Biological Sciences, Public Policy, Engineering, Neuroscience, Law, Business, Architecture, Psychiatry, and Dentistry as well as affiliated faculty from research centers and institutes at USC and from external organizations and universities.

Degree Requirements

Stages of the PhD Program

After admissions, prior to start of Year 1

• International students complete Immigration Status Verification (ISV) with the Office of International Students (Student Union Building, Room 300) 

1st year

• Complete Faculty Mentor form
• Complete IDP
• Enrollment in 16-24 units of coursework 
• Form Empirical Project Committee (Spring semester)
• 1st Year Screening (by May 31)

2nd year

• Continue enrollment in coursework (16-24 units)
• Complete required courses and electives by end of 2nd year
• Complete Empirical Project (by May 1)
• 2nd Year Screening (by May 31)
• Form Qualifying Exam Committee 

3rd year

Fall Semester:

• Completion of Qualifying Exam for advancement to candidacy:
  • The Written qualifying exam (submitted to Committee in September)
  • Oral qualifying exam (aka, Dissertation Proposal Defense) (no more than 60 days after submitting written qualifying exam paper, and at latest by the end of the Fall semester).

• Form Dissertation Committee 
• 3rd Year Screening (by May 31)
• Move forward to PhD Candidacy by the end of 3rd year once the Qualifying Exam has been passed.
• Maintain full time enrollment and continue taking coursework towards completing the 60-unit course requirement, including enrolling in quals and/or dissertation courses each semester.

4th year+

• Annual Dissertation Progress Reviews
• Annual Screenings (by May 31 of each year)
• PhD Defense (see Graduate school deadlines)
• Maintain full time enrollment and continue taking coursework towards completing the 60-unit course requirement, including enrolling in dissertation courses each semester.

Annual Screenings

Each year the PhD Committee shall review the performance of all students. Annual screenings will take into account grades, 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 each year during Finals week of the Spring Semester (and before May 31). 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. First year students will complete the IDP twice: first, when they begin the program, and then at the end of the Spring Semester in advance of their Annual Screening meeting with their primary mentor. 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. 

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 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. A letter from their Faculty Mentor
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. Completed Empirical Project form Section II (Submitted to the Student Services Advisor in the Student Services Office by May 31)
4. 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 31)
5. Completed Request to take the PhD Qualifying Examinations form
6. A letter from the Faculty Mentor

Note: Once the Student Services Advisor has received items 3. and 4. from the list above, 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).

(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. Failure to finish an incomplete within the time limit will result in the grade being changed to IX, which counts as an “F” grade on transcripts. 

Requirement to Maintain Good Academic Standing 

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 

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 re- search 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, re- admission 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. 

Summer Enrollment 

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 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. 

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.

1. 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.

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.

2. 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 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

Note: Other formats (e.g., NIH F31, NSF GRFP) may be allowed in specific circumstances with the written approval from the PhD Committee.

Scoring

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)

3. 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?

Scoring

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)

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.

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 current knowledge in the field and a demonstration that the PhD candidate has achieved sufficient mastery in the field to pursue independent research. 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

After successfully completing the Quals, students pursue their dissertation research under the guidance of a Faculty Dissertation Committee. 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. 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

The last step in completing the PhD is completion of the dissertation. 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.