Doctor of Philosophy in Materials Science and Engineering; Doctor of Philosophy in Materials Science and Engineering, and Engineering and Public Policy
SECTION 1: Welcome & Introduction
Welcome to the graduate program in Materials Science and Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University. The Department of Materials Science and Engineering (MSE) is one of seven academic departments in Carnegie Institute of Technology, the engineering college at Carnegie Mellon. MSE has a long and distinguished tradition in materials education and research, and today our faculty continue to address the more important and challenging issues at the forefront of science and technology.
Materials Science and Engineering is an interdisciplinary activity that applies the principles of basic sciences and engineering to understanding the behavior of materials, their development and applications. Both our undergraduate and graduate students are exposed to this interdisciplinary approach.
While this handbook is specific to your academic experience in the department, it is just one element of the Graduate Student Handbook Suite. There are several other resources within the suite that you should consult when needed:
SECTION 2: Program Vision, Mission, and Philosophy
2.1: Vision
To be a leader in the institutional, national, and international Materials Community recognized for excellence, innovation, and the impact of our research and educational programs.
2.2: Mission
Education:
• To provide a world-class educational environment where students receive a modern, rigorous, and innovative education in materials that will launch them into successful careers in academia, government, or industry
• To be recognized internationally as leaders in undergraduate and graduate materials education, with graduates who become leaders and changemakers Research
• To conduct focused research with undergraduate and graduate students that advances our fundamental understanding of materials and provides a foundation for improving existing or creating new technologies and products
• To conduct research in a number of areas that promote interdisciplinary research and complement the strategic vision of the college and university Knowledge dissemination
• To publish peer-reviewed journal articles and books, and to share the results of our educational initiatives and research
• To transfer innovations in material and technology to industry and government
Synergy
• To develop a friendly and supportive environment that allows our students, graduates, faculty, and staff to be successful
• To take leadership roles in professional societies, government panels, materials forums and councils, journal editorship, and conferences
• To lead the materials-based initiatives within the college and university
2.3: Philosophy
Graduate education in the Department of Materials Science and Engineering (MSE) at Carnegie Mellon is established upon a very broad basis. Emphasis is given to a spectrum of material areas, including nanotechnology, biomaterials, materials processing, structural and electronic, magnetic and optical materials, and computational materials. Along with the fundamentals of structure, defect state, thermodynamics and transport phenomena that underlie the entire field, education is focused equally between the materials classes of metals, ceramics, semiconductors and composite materials. Thus, students interested in topics such as nano- or bio-technology, material synthesis and processing, mechanical behavior of materials, the interrelationship between structure and properties, ceramic science and electronic, magnetic and optical materials will get a solid grounding in the fundamentals of these areas through the graduate curriculum. Courses in special technical subjects in other engineering and science departments, as well as specific research topics, provide the breadth needed for a balanced program and special degree options. The comprehensive nature of the overall program is indicated by departmental faculty interests, which are balanced between engineering and science, and focused on contemporary and future topics of relevance to the application of materials in society.
Graduate study in MSE is designed to provide students with a systematic development of the fundamental scientific and engineering principles that govern the behavior and application of all materials. Entering graduate students typically have undergraduate and sometimes graduate degree backgrounds in a wide range of disciplines in engineering and science. Programs of study are planned individually in consultation with the faculty and academic advisor. These programs may be directed toward fundamental science, engineering or a blend of the two, depending on the preference, capabilities and professional career goals of the student. Recommended courses often include those offered by other departments within the College of Engineering or by other colleges within Carnegie Mellon.
SECTION 3: Degrees Offered
The department offers the following graduate degree programs:
Master of Science in Materials Science and Engineering (Coursework)
Master of Science in Engineering & Technology Innovation Management
Master of Science in Artificial Intelligence Engineering in MSE
Master of Science in Materials Science (Research)
Master of Science in Computational Materials Science and Engineering
Master of Science in Additive Manufacturing
Doctor of Philosophy in Materials Science and Engineering
Doctor of Philosophy in Materials Science and Engineering, and Engineering and Public Policy
SECTION 4: Departmental Information
4.1: Departmental Personnel and College Liaison
In addition to your research advisor, your primary contacts in the department will be as follows:
● Academic administration: Suzanne Smith
● Stipend payments: Angie Pusateri
● Other financial matters such as health insurance and reimbursements: Anthony Talotta
● Any issues related to your progress: Either Dr. Beth Dickey (Department Head) or Dr. Chris Pistorius (Associate Department Head), or both.
● Laboratory equipment and safety: Reed Hoffmier
● Contact the College Liaison if you need to consult an impartial person outside the department: https://www.cmu.edu/wellbeing/resources/people.html#liaisons Faculty:
The MSE faculty are listed on our website: http://www.cmu.edu/engineering/materials/people/faculty/index.html Staff:
The Main Office of the MSE department is located in 3325 Wean Hall. MSE Staff members are located in both Wean Hall and Roberts Hall. MSE staff are here to assist you in your pursuit of graduate study. Please see our staff “point of contact” webpage to determine which staff member to contact for different items: https://mse.engineering.cmu.edu/directory/index.html
4.2: Diversity, Equity and Inclusion
The MSE department is dedicated to cultivating a diverse community that provides equitable opportunities for all students to benefit from our comprehensive graduate program offerings. Our fundamental approach to enhancing the student experience centers around fostering a strong sense of belonging, which we firmly believe is vital for academic and personal success, enabling individuals to overcome challenges and flourish in their educational journey. We understand that the diverse identities of our students can influence this sense of belonging, and we recognize the specific obstacles that students from historically underrepresented groups in engineering may face.
To address these challenges, we actively incorporate inclusive practices in our teaching and mentorship methods. Our goal is to create an open and respectful learning environment
where each student's perspective is valued, and they have the opportunity to develop meaningful connections with their instructors. In our research groups, we encourage diversity by bringing together individuals from different backgrounds and experiences, fostering innovative solutions.
To ensure the success of our Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts, we have established a department-level DEI committee comprising faculty, staff, graduate, and undergraduate students.
Furthermore, we have a dedicated faculty Director of Student Inclusion & Community, Dr. Vincent Sokalski, who works to enhance student belonging and facilitate meaningful relationships between faculty, staff, and students. If you would like to learn more about our ongoing DEI activities, offer suggestions for improvement, or share your experience in the program, please feel free to contact Vincent Sokalski at sokalski@cmu.edu.
It is essential to acknowledge that racism, sexism, and various biases continue to exist in society, both consciously and unconsciously. As a department, we are committed to doing better and encourage everyone to reflect on their biases. If you come across any incidents of bias within the department or at CMU, we encourage you to report them through the following link: https://www.cmu.edu/diversity/resources/bias-reporting.html
4.3: Laboratory Safety
Ensuring the safety of all Carnegie Mellon students, employees and visitors is an essential part of our activities. In the MSE Department, you can expect to encounter a range of hazards, whether you are in a group that does characterization, computation, or laboratory experimentation. The CMU Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S) group provides training and other resources to help ensure your safety: https://www.cmu.edu/ehs/index.html Detailed information on safety procedures is provided on the EH&S site. Some highlights are as follows:
• You are responsible for following safe practices for your own safety and the safety of others.
• Each research group has a group safety coordinator (typically a senior graduate student or postdoctoral researcher) who assists your advisor (Principal Investigator or PI) with safety inspections, and maintaining an awareness of safe practices. The group safety coordinator should be identified in SciShield (see below)
• Dr. Mandie Krause and Reed Hoffmier lead the MSE safety committee, meeting regularly with the group safety coordinators and providing guidance on safe practices.
• Whenever you encounter an unsafe situation, you have the right and obligation to stop work, to first remedy the situation; ask for assistance from one or more of the following: another group member, your advisor, your group safety coordinator, or the MSE facilities coordinator (Reed Hoffmier).
• To work in experimental laboratories, you are required to complete training in general safety and hazardous waste management with EH&S.
• Certain equipment and protocols require special training or could result in serious injury. To learn about safe practices in your lab, please refer to your group safety coordinator, advisor, Reed Hoffmier, or EH&S.
• Ask your advisor whenever you need any additional safety equipment or training
• The EH&S staff are very responsive and helpful: safety@andrew.cmu.edu.
• In emergencies, call the University Police at ×8-2323 or EH&S directly at ×8-8182 (from a cell phone, the numbers are 412-268-2323 and 412-268-8182).
• SciShield is the online software used to keep track of group members, training, documents such as work-alone forms, and laboratory chemical inventory: https://cmu.bioraft.com/
• The minimum personal protective equipment (PPE) to be worn in laboratories includes eye protection (safety glasses or goggles), long trousers, closed shoes, gloves, and a laboratory coat.
• Whenever you enter a laboratory or workshop, ensure that you know the location of fire extinguishers, eyewashes and emergency showers.
• Maintain a tidy work environment, for your safety and that of others.
• Any chemicals that you receive must be recorded in SciShield (“ChemTracker” section), and the inventory should be updated regularly
• Detailed information on handling and keeping track of chemicals is provided during EH&S training and in the chemical hygiene plan: https://www.cmu.edu/ehs/LaboratorySafety/chemical-safety/documents/chemical-hygiene-plan.pdf The chemical hygiene plan includes information on collection and safe disposal of used chemicals, biological material, sharps and glassware
• Hazardous waste must be handled appropriately and removed by EH&S: https://www.cmu.edu/ehs/hazardous-waste-management/chemical-waste.html
• Clean out hazardous materials when done using them and that have no foreseeable use
• If you need to work alone in a laboratory, you first need to complete a risk assessment with your advisor, identify any chemical, biological and process hazards, and document the procedures to mitigate the risks from these hazards. The procedure is to complete a “Permission to work alone form” with your advisor, and save this on SciShield: https://www.cmu.edu/ehs/Laboratory-Safety/chemical-safety/documents/ehsguideline working-alone-in-research-laboratories-shops-studios-and-work-areas.pdf
SECTION 5: Departmental Resources
5.1: Meeting Areas
Spaces are available in the department and elsewhere on campus to meet as study groups or for other discussions. The available spaces include:
• Doherty Hall A303 (available whenever no teaching activities are scheduled - see the calendar on Calcium: https://schedule.materials.cmu.edu/cgi-bin/Calcium40)
• Mehl Room (Wean Hall 2327), Roberts Hall 140, and Doherty Conference Room (A310)ask your group’s administrator for a booking (calendar on Calcium)
• Deck: At the end of the Wean 3300 hallway. Get the key from the Office Manager in Wean Hall 3325 if the door to the deck is locked.
• Coffee lounge (between Wean Hall 3340 and the deck) – featuring free coffee and a water dispenser
• Study spaces in the Hunt and Sorrells libraries: https://library.cmu.edu/services/studyspaces
5.2: Graduate Student Advisory Committee (GSAC)
The Graduate Student Advisory Committee (GSAC) is an organization for graduate students in the Materials Science and Engineering department at Carnegie Mellon University. The GSAC leadership plan social events that include both students and faculty members in order to foster relationships outside of classes and the lab. Events are tailored to help graduate students prepare for various milestones in the PhD program, act as an interface between MSE graduate students and faculty, and encourage interaction and collaboration between students.
You will receive a key or keycard access to your assigned office. If relevant, your advisor must request a key for you for each specific laboratory.
5.4: Mail
If you have outgoing mail, either campus or regular, the postal clerk picks up the mail at 8:00 am. Any incoming mail for you will be retained by Annie Brinkerhoff in the main office (3325 Wean).
Use your home address for personal correspondence and packages – do not have these sent to the department.
5.5: Addressing Campus Mail
All campus mail should be addressed with the person’s name, department, and building only.
Example: First Name Last Name
Materials Science and Engineering
Wean Hall 3325
5.6: Address for Incoming Mail
To ensure that mail and/or packages arrive at the department without any problems, you should advise that shippers address the package in the following way: First Name Last Name
Carnegie Mellon University 311 Hamerschlag Drive
Materials Science and Engineering Department
Wean Hall 3325 Pittsburgh, PA 15213
If space does not allow for that many lines, you can omit the department.
5.7: Telephone Calls (landlines)
Campus calls
Dial “8” and only the last four digits of a campus number, e.g. 8-2700
Outside calls
Dial “9” when dialing an outside toll-free line. In emergencies call 8-2323 (when using a cell phone, call 412-268-2323)
5.8: Copying and Scanning
The department has two color copiers/scanners you can use for research-related work in Wean Hall (behind the coffee lounge next to 3340) or in the Roberts “Take 5” area. These machines perform many functions such as scanning, two-sided copying, collation, reduction and enlargements.
5.9: University Stores (computer store, bookstore, and art store)
Purchases from the University Center Stores require a University Store Requisition form, completely filled out, with the signature of your faculty advisor. This form can also be obtained from your faculty advisor’s administrator. Upon your return, please be sure to give the receipt to the administrator.
5.10: Physics Stockroom (7322 and 7421 Wean Hall)
The Wean Hall Physics Stockroom is located on the 7th floor. Useful supplies from the Physics Stockroom include stationery, disposable gloves, sample boxes, basic laboratory items including glassware and wash bottles, passive electronic components, small hand tools, and fasteners. Items are taken on “the honor system.” In other words, complete the electronic form located at the stockroom verifying your name, items taken, and the Oracle (contract) number assigned to the project for which the items will be used. If you are unsure of the Oracle number, please ask your advisor’s administrator for the information. Please don’t abuse this system.
5.11: Mellon Institute Storeroom (389 Mellon Institute)
The Mellon Institute Storeroom stocks a range of chemicals, glassware, safety and office supplies; see the website for a list of storeroom items: https://www.cmu.edu/mcs/mistoreroom/
5.12: Ordering and returning gas tanks
Students/visitors are to order all cylinders through the Main Office, using the form given in Appendix A: Gas order form. Please do not submit any orders directly to the supplier. Before ordering any gas, make sure there is no redundancy within your advisor’s group; gases may be shared within your group. For accounting purposes gases should not be shared with other research groups. Order gas with an existing Oracle charge account number. Once the gas is received, email the MSE Office Manager the cylinder tank number. It is handwritten on the tag and/or on the barcode on the neck of the cylinder.
When requesting a pick-up of empty cylinders, send an email to the MSE Office Manager with the tank number(s) that need to be picked up and which lab they are in. When returning gas cylinders, no matter the date of pick up rental expenditures coincide with the month of cylinder return. Thus, returning cylinders on Jan. 1 or Jan. 31 would be charged the same rental fees. It is strongly recommended that all empty gas cylinders are to be returned at the end of each month to avoid being overcharged.
5.13: Departmental Purchases
Students are not permitted to make purchases or sign contracts on behalf of the University. A designated buyer, authorized by the MSE department, must arrange all purchases.
In general, purchases of less than $5,000 are made with a departmental credit card (“PCard”) and do not require a purchase order. For purchases greater than $5,000, Shelby Kilpatrick will generate a purchase order. For any service – such as maintenance of equipment that is not already covered by a master agreement – a contract needs to be signed by the University Contracts Office before purchase of the service can be approved.
In order to secure items and services for your lab (which may include equipment, software, tools, repairs etc.), you must provide pertinent information (as outlined below).
Compose an email containing the information, copy your advisor for approval and email the relevant buyer for your research group (as listed below).
The buyer will forward an email confirmation directly when the order has been placed with the vendor. You will be notified by email to inform you of the delivery and request for a timely pick-up. All packages will be received/directed to: Carnegie Mellon University, MSE Department, 311 Hamerschlag Drive, WEH 3325, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Requests for hazardous materials will follow this same procedure but should be emailed to Reed Hoffmier at rhoffmie@andrew.cmu.edu
Required information (missing or omitted info will cause delays):
REQUEST DATE: dd-month-yy
NAME: ______
PI NAME: _____ (*cc your advisor on your email request to the buyer)
PROJECT NAME: _____
TYPE: (supply, service, equipment, software)
SHIPPING TYPE? (next day, overnight, regular) - shipping to another address? ______________
ORACLE charge #: (Example: 12456.1.134567)
SUPPLIER/VENDOR: (Example: Ted Pella, Inc.)
ITEM with description: (Example: Silicon AFM Probes, Tap 300 AL -G, Aluminum Reflex Coating; add a web link if available)
QUANTITY: #_____
Product#:(Example: TAP300AL-G-50)
UNITS per:(Example: pkg/50)
Price: $xxx.xx (per unit, and total)
WHERE item will be utilized - Lab location (Building, Lab room #) _______
Buyer Research groups supported
Shelby Kilpatrick
Bettinger Bockstaller Dabo
De Graef Islam Kurchin Krause O’Connor Porter Salvador Skowronski Sokalski
Taheri-Mousavi Whitacre
Kelly Rockenstein Dickey Chamorro Heard Marom Pistorius Rohrer
You may be reimbursed for work-related purchases. These should have the approval of your faculty advisor prior to purchase. Please note: CMU will not reimburse sales tax on any purchases you made even if the purchase was for university-related work. Present the receipt(s) and account number to your faculty advisor’s administrator. Please note that it is university policy to submit a receipt for reimbursement within 30 days of incurring the expense. You are strongly recommended to sign up for expense reimbursement direct deposit – if not, a check will be mailed. The MSE Director of Finance (Anthony Talotta) will email the form that you need to sign up for direct deposit; ask Anthony if you have any questions.
5.15: Taxes
Although subject to federal taxes, student stipends are generally not assessed local or state taxes. The deadline for local, state, and federal taxes is April 15. Questions about your tax status should be addressed to the IRS or the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue, or the state where you are a resident. The Office of International Education has resources on tax filing for international students: https://www.cmu.edu/oie/maintaining-status/resources/taxinformation/index.html
SECTION 6: Advising
6.1: Selection of Thesis Topic and Advisor
There are two mechanisms for the selection of a Ph.D. advisor: (1) pre-selection: an incoming graduate student communicates with one or more potential research advisors during the Summer months after admission to the program, and comes to a mutual agreement with a particular advisor before the first day of classes in August; or (2) graduate student pool: those students who do not pre-select an advisor must spend time during the month of September talking to potential research advisors, based on a list of available research projects that will be made available by the department. Individual faculty members who have open slots will give short presentations describing their research project(s). By mid-October, each student in the pool must submit a list of three research projects, ranked from top choice to third choice. The MSE faculty will then attempt to assign all pool students to one of their top choices by the end of October.
6.2: Individual Development Plan
Individual Development Plan (IDP): Individual Development Plans (IDPs) are meant to promote professional and personal growth by formally documenting goals and facilitating dialogue, collaboration, and accountability between advisors and advisees. Carnegie Mellon has developed a set of templates that can be used by doctoral students and their advisors to create an Individual Development Plan. You can find the templates here: https://www.cmu.edu/graduate/professional-development/index.html
6.3: Review/Redress of Academic Conflicts
If you have an academic concern, the first person to contact – in person or by email – is the instructor (if the concern is with a class), or your advisor. Other persons to contact include Dr. Dickey and Dr. Pistorius within the department, and the College of Engineering liaison (see also Section 4.1: Departmental Personnel and College Liaison)
SECTION 7: Doctoral Degree Requirements
7.1: Residency Requirements
The university requires PhD students to have a minimum of one year in residency on a CMU campus. If your program has additional residency requirements, detail them here.
U.S. government regulations require F-1 and J-1 international students to be enrolled in an inperson degree program, with in-person expectation coursework. Even though this immigration requirement is specifically for international students, residency requirements in a degree program must be consistent for both international and domestic students.
7.2: Required Units for Degree Attainment
In addition to the research requirements, doctoral students are also required to complete 96 units of coursework.* This includes 36 units of MSE core classes that must be completed in the first Fall semester. The remaining units may be made up of graduate level classes in the MSE department or graduate level classes in the other departments within the College of Engineering, the School of Computer Science (SCS), or the Mellon College of Science (MCS). Classes outside of MSE must be approved by the student's advisor. While the 96 unit curriculum should be comprised entirely of graduate classes, it is generally permissible to include one senior level MSE undergraduate class, with the exception of 27-454, 27-555, and 27-556.
*Please note: Students enrolled in the MSE Ph.D. program are required to complete at least 12 units of 27-991 Materials Science and Engineering Teaching Internship during the period after completion of their Research Performance evaluation, and before the Spring semester of the 4th year of the Ph.D. program. Students should discuss the appropriate time to apply for and fulfill this requirement with their academic advisor(s). No more than 24 units of 27-991 can count toward the coursework requirement of the Ph.D. program.
7.3: Core Courses
Doctoral students must take all three of the following courses, typically in their first (Fall) semester:
27-766 Defects and Diffusion in Materials 12
27-796 Structure and Characterization of Materials 12
27-798 Thermodynamics of Materials 12
In addition, the 1-unit pass/fail course “Research Skills and Professional Development” (27772; first Fall semester) is compulsory for first-year Ph.D. students, as is attendance of the Seminar Series (27-774; 1 unit; pass/fail; every semester).
Adequate performance in the core courses is required to remain a candidate in the Ph.D. program. See the section on “Academic Progress: First year” in §Error! Reference source not f ound. for more details.
7.4: Electives
See Appendix B: Projected electives for a list of electives that are likely to be available.
7.5: Department Policy/Process for Withdrawing from a Course
Ph.D. students need to be registered for at least 48 units at all times to maintain full-time status. If a course is dropped, the units for 27-775 (Thesis research) need to be increased to reach 48 units. (NOTE: Full-time status is required to receive a stipend and to satisfy visa requirements.)
Students taking undergraduate and Master’s level courses must follow the procedures and deadlines for adding, dropping, or withdrawing from courses as identified on the academic calendar. Information can be found at https://www.cmu.edu/hub/registrar/course-changes/index.html
There is a separate calendar for doctoral-level courses; see the academic calendar at: https://www.cmu.edu/hub/calendar/index.html
7.6: Protocol for Evaluation of Transfer Credit
The Department of Materials Science and Engineering will accept up to 24 units (2 courses) of graduate transfer credit toward Ph.D. coursework according to the policies outlined on the College of Engineering website: https://engineering.cmu.edu/education/academic-policies/graduate-policies/registrationgrading-credit.html#transfer-credit-&-special-students
Only official and final college or university transcripts will be accepted for the awarding of transfer credit. Grade reports, letters and the like are not acceptable. Official transcripts for the awarding of transfer credit will reside in the student's permanent academic folder in the department. Grades for transfer units will not be counted in the Carnegie Mellon GPA.
Transfer units will be accepted for:
o Graduate-level courses that have not been counted toward a previous degree at another university
o Courses with a 3.0 GPA or higher
o Courses that can be considered part of the M.S. graduate program in the MSE department
Students must have successfully completed at least 36 units in the graduate program before the units can be transferred.
7.7: Independent Study/ Directed Reading
Independent study / directed reading (such as 27-773) cannot be applied towards the coursework requirements of the MSE Ph.D. program.
7.8: Teaching Requirements/Opportunities
Students enrolled in the MSE Ph.D. program are required to complete at least 12 units of 27-991 Materials Science and Engineering Teaching Internship during the period after completion of their Research Performance evaluation, and before the Spring semester of the
4th year of the Ph.D. program. Students should discuss the appropriate time to apply for and fulfill this requirement with their academic advisor(s). No more than 24 units of 27-991 can count toward the coursework requirement of the Ph.D. program.
Suzanne Smith will distribute information on the available teaching internship positions at least 2 weeks before the start of the semester.
Graduate students are required to have a certain level of fluency in English before they can instruct in Pennsylvania, as required by the English Fluency in Higher Education Act of 1990. Through this Act, all institutions of higher education in the state are required to evaluate and certify the English fluency of all instructional personnel, including teaching assistants and interns. The full university policy can be reviewed at:
The fluency of all instructional personnel will be rated by Language Support in the Student Academic Success Center to determine at what level of responsibility the student can instruct. In a continuing effort to improve technical and interpersonal communication, it is the policy of the department that all international students, whose first language is not English, should attempt to pass the Student Academic Success Center's International Teaching Assistant (ITA) test before graduation.
In addition to administering the International Teaching Assistant (ITA) Test (a mandatory screening test for any non-native speaker of English), Language Support in the Student Academic Success Center helps teaching interns who are non-native English speakers develop fluency and cultural understanding to teach successfully at Carnegie Mellon. Visit the Student Academic Success Center website for additional information: https://www.cmu.edu/student-success/
7.9: MSE Ph.D. Program Requirements
The Doctoral degree emphasizes the creation of new knowledge through extensive independent research, the interpretation of phenomena revealed by research, and the extraction of general principles upon which predictions can be made. In the MSE department, doctoral research can be conducted in a range of areas, including nanomaterials, biomaterials, materials for energy applications, metals, ceramics, electronic materials, magnetic materials, and materials computation. Each Doctoral student's research is guided by a faculty advisor and a dissertation committee with milestones that allow graduation in four years or less. The milestones and expectations for doctoral students are described below.
Applicants must supply the following materials to qualify for admission:
● Unofficial transcripts from previous degree programs
● Essay questions
● English proficiency, if a non-native English speaker
● Three letters of recommendation
● The application fee (not required for students who completed their previous degree at CMU)
All admissions decisions are made by the Department Head, based on recommendations from the graduate recruiting committee. A typical student qualifying for admission will have an undergraduate GPA greater than 3.0. For non-native English-speaking applicants, the IELTS band score should exceed 6.5, TOEFL should exceed 84 (with 22 as individual sub-score), or an overall Duolingo score of at least 105. Each year, we enroll between 20 and 25 doctoral students.
See section 6.1: Selection of Thesis Topic and Advisor, for information on choosing your topic and advisor.
7.9.2: Joint Ph.D. program with Engineering and Public Policy
A joint Ph.D. degree with the Department of Engineering and Public Policy (EPP) is possible. If an MSE student wishes to pursue a joint Ph.D. in EPP, they must first receive the approval of their primary faculty advisor, and apply to EPP within the first academic year of PhD study. They will need to complete the EPP online application and provide a new letter of recommendation, preferably from their faculty advisor in their home department. They will also need to provide test scores (such as TOEFL, if needed) and transcripts. Copies of these documents may be sent directly to the EPP admissions office from MSE. Students pursuing joint degrees are expected to complete the qualifying examinations and teaching requirements in both departments unless otherwise documented and approved by the College of Engineering College Council. Typically, one defense committee is formed that satisfies the requirements of both departments. As students near degree completion, they should follow the MSE thesis submission rules and deadlines. Students may refer to the College of Engineering policy on joint degrees with EPP for more information, https://engineering.cmu.edu/education/academic-policies/graduate-policies/degrees.html.
7.9.3: Academic Progress: First Year
Performance in Core Classes:
To remain a candidate for the Ph.D. degree after the first Fall semester, a student must: have a letter grade in each of the three MSE core courses; and have a core QPA greater than or equal to 3.0; and have no more than one core grade below a B; and have no core grades of C- or below.
In addition to these criteria, to remain a candidate for the Ph.D. degree at any point after the first Fall semester, and at graduation, the overall QPA, excluding independent project and research grades, must be 3.0 or above.
If the student does not satisfy any one of these criteria, the following will apply: Continuation in the Ph.D. program will be based on MSE faculty consensus, considering the student’s research performance, their likely ability to achieve a 3.0 MSE coursework average by the end of the immediately following Spring semester, and their likely ability to meet the core requirements by the end of next Fall semester. (The student
First
may be given the option to repeat one or more core classes during the following Fall based on the outcome of the First Year Review.)
Year Review and Qualification:
At the end of the second semester, the MSE faculty will review the academic and research performance of each first year doctoral student to determine if they are qualified for continued study. The main factors are the candidate’s core and two-semester QPAs, and their advisor’s assessment of research performance. (See Appendix E: First Year Qualification Checklist) If the candidate passes this review, then they will continue as a student in good standing. If the candidate fails the review they will leave the doctoral program prior to the start of the next academic year. This decision is based on a faculty vote.
7.9.4: Performance and Research Requirements to Maintain Status as a Doctoral Student
Doctoral degrees are awarded primarily for demonstrated excellence in research. There are four major steps in a candidate's advancement toward a doctoral degree: A Research Performance Evaluation, Selection of a Dissertation Committee, a Thesis Overview, and a Dissertation Defense. Each of these steps is described in detail in the following sections. Note the specific deadlines by which each step should be completed. Should student or project circumstances make it impossible to keep to these deadlines, the student – with the support of their advisor(s) – should request an extension from Dr. Dickey and Dr. Pistorius.
(i) Compliance with University policy and standards for research ethics. All university academic policies, non-academic policies, and community standards are detailed in the student handbook: http://www.studentaffairs.cmu.edu/theword/university/.
In addition, students are expected to maintain ethical standards in their research. For reference, see: On being a scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research, which is available online at https://doi.org/10.17226/12192. Violations of University policy or accepted ethical standards may result in immediate withdrawal of financial support. To remain in the doctoral program, all students must complete the “Responsible Conduct of Research Certification”, which is a web-based ethics training class.
(ii) Adequate progress in dissertation research.
Adequate progress is determined by the student's research advisor and committees for the Research Performance Evaluation, thesis overview, and final dissertation. The research advisor and Department Head will notify the student if their progress is judged to be inadequate. If inadequate progress persists for a semester or more after notification, the student is no longer eligible for financial support or participation in the doctoral degree program.
Each graduate student shall submit a research report by the last day of each Fall and Spring semester, using the template provided in Appendix F: Semester Research Report. The advisor will evaluate the report and assign a letter grade, which then becomes the student’s research grade for that semester (course: Thesis 27775). The advisor will also assign a grade for summer research (course: Graduate Reading and Research 27773).
If the student’s research progress is insufficient, according to the expectations of the advisor, then a letter grade no higher than a “C” will be assigned, and the advisor will spell out in writing which aspects of research the student is expected to improve upon. A “C” grade also signifies department intervention. A student who has received a “C” grade will receive close scrutiny during the next semester’s research evaluation; the student is expected to specifically describe how they have addressed any issue(s). Two consecutive semesters with a “C” or below grade automatically imply termination from the graduate degree program.
(iii) Completion of Research Performance Evaluation
Doctoral students are required to take a Research Performance Evaluation by the end of the first semester of the second year of the Ph.D. program. Students who do not complete the exam are not eligible for financial support. If a student fails this evaluation, there may be a possibility for a second attempt before the end of the next semester. If the exam has not been passed by the end of that next semester, the student is no longer eligible for financial support or participation in the doctoral degree program.
See section 7.9.5: Research Performance Evaluation for more details on the Research Performance Evaluation.
(iv) Completion of the thesis overview before the beginning of the fourth year
Doctoral students are required to complete their thesis overview before the beginning of the fourth year of the Ph.D. program. Students who do not complete the overview are not eligible for financial support. If the overview is judged to be inadequate, the candidate has no more than six months to satisfy the committee. If at the end of the six months the committee still has not approved the overview, the student is no longer eligible for financial support or participation in the doctoral degree program.
See section 7.9.7: Thesis Overview for more details.
See also the University’s Summary of Graduate Student Appeal and Grievance Procedures; students can appeal any/all decisions on their progress.
7.9.5:
Research Performance Evaluation
Before the end of the first semester of the second year of the Ph.D. program, each candidate must take a research performance evaluation. The research performance evaluation committee consists of three MSE faculty members (none of whom is the candidate’s research advisor), at least two of whom have primary affiliations in the MSE Department; two committee members are selected by the candidate and the advisor, and one is appointed by the Department Head. Once the candidate has secured the two faculty members the candidate must email Prof. Pistorius (pistorius@cmu.edu) and ask him to assign the third member of the committee.
Once all three committee members have been assigned, the candidate must find a day and time that will work for them and the candidate’s advisor(s). Allow at least two hours for the RPE. The candidate should work with their advisor’s administrator to find a room. Once the committee and date have been fixed, send these details to Suzanne Smith AND to Prof. Pistorius as soon as possible but at least two weeks prior to the RPE date, for
preparation of the committee signature form, and to set up the committee information in Canvas.
The candidate will prepare a written document of not more than 15 pages that will be submitted on Canvas at least ten calendar days prior to the evaluation; if the deadline is not met, then the committee shall cancel the scheduled event, and a new date shall be set. A short guide to writing the RPE document, with formatting instructions, can be found in Appendix G: Research Performance Evaluation Document. The candidate must also bring the Committee Page to the meeting (for the faculty to sign).
During the exam, the candidate makes an oral presentation of their research progress lasting not more than 30 minutes. The slides for the presentation must be numbered sequentially. The presentation is followed by questions from the committee until a conclusion on the outcome of the examination is reached. Only MSE faculty members are permitted to attend the Research Performance Evaluation.
During the research performance evaluation, the candidate is expected to demonstrate:
● a fundamental understanding of the research goals of the project
● a knowledge of background literature related to the project
● an understanding of the research tools that are used to accomplish project goals
● a hypothesis for the experiments performed to date and for the immediate future
● an ability to develop a research plan
● an ability to produce and analyze their own research results
● an ability to integrate materials fundamentals that are relevant to the project
The RPE committee members each fill out an “MSE RPE Committee Checklist and Evaluation Instructions” form (see Appendix H: RPE Committee Rubric). At the conclusion of the evaluation, the candidate receives immediate oral feedback on both the strengths and the weaknesses in all areas listed above, and the results are communicated to the Department. The candidate will be provided with a written summary of the RPE within two weeks. Passing this evaluation allows candidates to remain in the Ph.D. program. If a candidate fails this evaluation, they may be permitted to make a second attempt before the end of the next semester. In such cases, a new committee is selected with one member from the original committee and two new members.
7.9.6: Selection of Dissertation Committee
The candidate, in consultation with the advisor, should arrange a doctoral thesis committee by the beginning of the third year of the Ph.D. program. The doctoral thesis committee will be chaired by the advisor, and will have at least three additional members. The requirements for the committee are that at least two of the members have a primary affiliation with the MSE department1 and at least one of the members is not primarily affiliated2 with the MSE department. The candidate should carefully choose committee members who can provide supplemental resources, stimulate critical thinking, and assist in the candidate’s development. As such, the candidate is strongly encouraged to interact regularly with their committee members.
The candidates should continue to further develop their proposal presented at the RPE detailing the research plan and updating the timeline, results, and analysis sections. These
developments should be discussed with doctoral thesis committee members, either individually or as a group, by the beginning of the third year of the Ph.D. program.
1 "primarily affiliated" MSE faculty are those whose salary is at least partially paid by the MSE department.
2 "not primarily affiliated" includes qualified people who may not be employed by CMU, CMU faculty from other departments, CMU faculty who have a courtesy appointment in MSE, and MSE adjunct faculty.
7.9.7: Thesis Overview
Before the end of the third year of the Ph.D. program, the candidate must convene the selected thesis committee for an overview of their dissertation.
The candidate should prepare a written document and an oral presentation that convey and justify their plan for completing their dissertation. The written document and the 20-30 minute presentation should be prepared in accordance with the standards for a final dissertation but are expected to be briefer. The document must be distributed to committee members at least ten (10) calendar days prior to the oral presentation; if the deadline is not met, then the committee shall cancel the scheduled event, and a new date shall be set. The date and time of thesis overview are advertised within the department, and can be attended by any member of the MSE community. The candidate should prepare an announcement at least two weeks prior to the date of the exam that includes the following information: the date, time, place, candidate name, title, and dissertation committee. The candidate should send the announcement to Suzanne Smith for distribution within the department.
A plan and a projected timeline to carry out the necessary work to complete their dissertation should be given in the presentation.
It is important to emphasize that, at the time of the overview, there may be considerable work remaining before the dissertation is completed and conclusive findings may not yet have been reached. However, the overview presentation and document should demonstrate the following five items:
● The candidate is able to place their research in the context of the background literature and defend how their research represents (will represent) an advancement of the state of knowledge in the field.
● A clear hypothesis (or clear hypotheses) has guided the production and analysis of publishable research results.
● The path to reach the stated goals of the thesis is clear and the candidate has mastered the skills required to complete the research; questions of feasibility should be largely absent.
● The scope of the research, analysis, and integration are deemed appropriate by the committee to form an acceptable Ph.D. dissertation.
● The student must attach as a separate appendix or a clearly labeled chapter within the main body of the document, a copy of each manuscript for which that student is an author. The candidate must attach a detailed plan for how the research results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals. The committee will provide feedback on the publication plan.
At the conclusion of the overview, the committee shall meet in private to prepare written comments for the candidate that include feedback on the four points above, as well as suggestions for enhancing the quality of the thesis. Each committee member will fill out a Thesis Overview Feedback Form (see Appendix I: Thesis overview feedback form); after the overview, the advisor fills out a Thesis Overview Feedback Summary Form (see Appendix J: Thesis Overview Feedback Form (Advisor)) that is afterwards provided to the student. This form, with a written response, must accompany the final thesis copy when submitted to the committee.
A signature sheet – on which the committee members sign to confirm the outcome of the thesis overview – will be circulated to the committee electronically.
If the committee is not satisfied that the overview demonstrates a feasible plan for the thesis, the candidate may be asked to repeat the overview between four and six months after the initial examination. Approval by the committee is a requirement for continuation in the doctoral program.
7.9.8: PhD Dissertation and Defense
The doctoral dissertation must embody the results of extended research, be an original contribution to knowledge, and include material worthy of publication. It should demonstrate the candidate’s ability to conduct an independent investigation, to abstract principles upon which predictions can be made, and to interpret in a logical manner facts and phenomena revealed by the research.
The written dissertation must be prepared according to the college guidelines. The thesis document (soft copy; hard copy only if requested by a committee member) along with a response to the Thesis Overview Feedback Summary Form must be submitted to the committee at least three weeks (21 calendar days) before the tentative defense date; if the deadline is not met, then the committee shall cancel the scheduled event, and a new date shall be set. The committee members have one week to verify that the overview comments were properly incorporated in the thesis document. If the dissertation is accepted by the Committee, the candidate is eligible for a final public examination. If not, then the committee informs the student in writing of deficiencies that need to be resolved before a new thesis defense date can be scheduled.
The candidate should prepare an announcement at least two weeks prior to the date of the exam that includes the following information: the date, time, place, candidate name, title, and
dissertation committee. The candidate should send the announcement to Suzanne Smith for distribution within the department.
The defense is chaired by the candidate’s advisor. At the start of the defense, the candidate gives a presentation of 30-45 minutes. Opportunity is then given for questions from attendees (other than the thesis committee). The thesis committee then question the candidate on the candidate’s research project and contributions. After the questions, the committee confers in a closed session, to decide whether the candidate passes, and on any required corrections to the written dissertation.
A signature sheet – on which the committee members sign to confirm the outcome of the thesis overview – will be circulated to the committee electronically.
Upon satisfactorily passing this examination, the candidate will be recommended for the doctoral degree. One electronic version of the dissertation must be submitted to Suzanne Smith, who will forward the electronic version to the Dean of the College of Engineering for approval.
7.9.9: Process for Completing a Master’s Degree En Route to a Ph.D.
Once students have completed at least 72 units of coursework and 24 units of research, they have the option to apply for the awarding of the degree Master of Science in Materials Science & Engineering. Contact Paige Houser if you are interested in exercising this option.
7.9.10: Certification of Degree
Once all requirements have been fulfilled, the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Materials Science and Engineering is certified by the academic program advisor (Suzanne Smith) along with the department head.
8. Additional department policies/protocols
8.1: Verification of Enrollment
Enrollment Services is the only University office that can provide an official letter of enrollment, official transcript and enrollment verification. Enrollment verification can be requested online through The HUB at: https://www.cmu.edu/hub/registrar/student-records/verifications/enrollment.html
8.2: Change of Address
The MSE Department encourages students to keep their current local address up-to-date in Student Information Online (SIO). This supports a university initiative to have accurate living information for students for official program/department/college/university notices, the
ability to facilitate wellness checks, ensure international students are in compliance with visa requirements, etc.
Students can change their address using SIO, which is available via the HUB website: http://www.cmu.edu/hub/index.html.
8.3: New Policies
Departmental and college policies and protocols are binding, but also evolve: degree attainment criteria change and policies and protocols are updated from time to time. In general, students will be expected to comply with the policies as stated in the version of the handbook that was current when they started the program.
8.4: Time Away from Academic Responsibilities
Students with graduate assistantships* are expected to continue with their research during academic breaks (including Summer months) with the exception of official university holidays and closures. Paid time off for personal business or vacations generally is not included as part of a graduate student’s financial support. A supported graduate student who wants to take a short break (up to ten days per calendar year**) must get approval for that break from their advisor and, if required by the terms of the student’s support package, must make up the work. Supported graduate students wishing to take longer periods of personal time off must do so without financial support and must receive approval from their advisor at least five weeks prior to the requested time off. The advisor will notify the Department’s Business Office of any such arrangements so that an appropriate adjustment in the student’s support package can be processed.
*Prior to making any travel plans, students must check with their research advisor regarding any restrictions that might be imposed on travel due to the terms of the grant that supports the student.
**Any unused days can be carried into the next calendar year (maximum of 10 days); firstyear students beginning in the Fall semester will receive four days since it is a partial year.
University Holidays:
New Year's Day
Martin Luther King Day
Memorial Day
Juneteenth
Independence Day
Labor Day
Thanksgiving Day
Day After Thanksgiving
Christmas Eve
Christmas Day
New Year's Eve
8.5: Research Internship Opportunities
Doctoral students wishing to participate in an off-campus summer internship are responsible for securing their position and must have completed their Research Performance Evaluation prior to the start of the internship. The Internship must have the approval of their faculty thesis advisor. In addition, some fellowships require the completion of annual summer
internships.
Students may register for 3 units of “27-995 Internship” during the summer session and those units may be used toward the degree requirements. For the 3 units of 27-995 to satisfy the degree requirements, students must submit the “Internship Plan” (Appendix C: Ph.D. Summer Internship Plan) to their thesis advisor before the summer session begins. At the completion of the internship, students must submit to their thesis advisor the “Internship Report” (Appendix D: Ph.D. Summer Internship Report) along with a 1-2 page summary of the accomplishments achieved during the internship. The faculty advisor will be responsible for assigning a letter grade for these units at the end of the Summer semester. International students are required to consult with the Office of International Education for eligibility before seeking an internship/co-op or signing an offer contract. It is also recommended that international students review the CPT handout: https://www.cmu.edu/oie/foreign-students/docs/cpt.pdf
Some Resources to Explore Potential Internships:
● Faculty Recommendations
● Career and Professional Development Center https://www.cmu.edu/career/
SECTION 9: Grading Scale
In general the following grading scale is used for graduate classes:
SECTION 10: Department Financial Support
Stipend payments
Graduate students who are admitted with support will receive a stipend. This payment is paid semi-monthly. The university runs a paperless payroll system; all employees and students must sign up for direct deposit in Workday.
A stipend is not a payment for work performed or a salary. It is a scholarship that is provided by the department to facilitate a graduate student’s education. Stipends are only awarded to full-time students. A student receiving a stipend may not work for other remuneration either on or off campus.
There are two types of stipends. The Graduate Research Assistantship is taxable and is subject to federal tax withholding. The tuition stipend is not taxable. Please note that should you receive any amount of pay greater than or less than your usual taxable stipend, an error has occurred. If you see that this has happened please report it to the MSE Business Office immediately. You must return additional money to the department, without exception and regardless of when the error is caught. Likewise, if you were mistakenly underpaid, then we will fix the problem and pay the amount to you as quickly as possible. Please note that it is your responsibility to verify that you have received the correct amount of stipend each month.
Health insurance
The department provides full health insurance coverage to supported PhD students. The HUB’s website (https://www.cmu.edu/hub/new-grad/enrollment-finances.html) also has information specific to health insurance coverage and waivers for doctoral students.
GSA conference funding
Conference Funding can be provided by GSA and the Provost’s Office for students, student work groups or groups to attend a conference, whether as a participant or as a presenter. The process is managed by the Office of Graduate and Postdoctoral Affairs. Students can find more information about the application process and deadlines at: https://www.cmu.edu/graduate/professional-development/index.html
Appendices
Appendix A: Gas order form
Step 1: Fill in the “New Cylinder Order” information (section 1) and return to the front office for submission (Wean 3325).
Step 2: Once the cylinder has arrived, please send Annie Brinkerhoff the tank number, so it can be recorded in the departmental database.
If you have any questions about sizes, processing time or pricing, you should contact the Mellon Storeroom directly at x8-3212.
Section 1: New Cylinder Order
Name _____________________ Order Date _____________________
Advisor’s Name _________________ Delivery Date _________________ (Tuesdays and Fridays ONLY!)
To be delivered to Lab# __________ Quantity
Purity and Type of Gas _____ ___________ Size __
Oracle Number ____________________________________________
Phone Number _ ___ Email
*Advisor or Advisor’s Administrator Signature
Section 2:
Cylinder Received (TO BE COMPLETED BY MAIN OFFICE)
Cylinder #_____________ Date Received___________________________
RETURN PROCESS:
Please send an email to Ray Butko (rbutko@andrew.cmu.edu) and Paul Smith (ptsmith@andrew.cmu.edu); be sure to copy Annie Brinkerhoff (abrinker@andrew.cmu.edu) listing all of the tank numbers you are requesting for pick-up and the lab where they are located.
Appendix B: Projected electives
Please note that this list is subject to revision – verify the available courses in the Schedule of Classes (https://enr-apps.as.cmu.edu/open/SOC/SOCServlet)
Electives (cross-listed undergraduate + graduate)
27-421/721 Processing Design
27-500/702 Metal-Environment Reactions 9/12 Odd Fall
27-503/703 (39-602) Additive Manufacturing and Materials 9/12 All Fall
27-514 (42-676) Bio-nanotechnology: Principles and Applications 9 All Fall
27-520/720 (42-612) Tissue Engineering 12 All Fall
27-533/733 Principles of Growth of Semiconductors 6 Even Fall - Mini 1
27-515/27-734 Methods of Computational Materials Science 9/12 All Spring
27-542/742 Processing and Prop. of Thin Films 9/12 All Spring
27-561/761 Kinetics of Metallurgical Reactions and Processes 6
27-565/705 Nanostructured Materials 9/12
27-591 Mechanics of Materials 9 Even Fall
27-592/792 Solidification Processing 9/12 Odd Spring
27-537/737 Data Analytics and Machine Learning for Matls.
27-577/777
(24-652)
27-752 (18-817)
Appendix C: Ph.D. Summer Internship Plan
Student Name
Degree Program
Organization Providing Internship
Organization Address
Supervisor Information Name Title Phone Email
Period of Assignment
Begin Date End Date
Internship Title Website Listing
Internship Description
Approval Date
Student Signature
Academic Advisor Signature
Appendix D: Ph.D. Summer Internship Report
This form is to be accompanied by a 1-2 page summary report of the internship experience.
Student Name
Degree Program
Organization Providing Internship
Organization Address
Supervisor Information Name Title Phone
Email
Period of Assignment: Begin Date End Date
Approval
Student Signature
Academic Advisor Signature
Research Advisor Signature
Date
Appendix E: First Year Qualification Checklist
CANDIDATE NAME:
DATE:
ADVISOR:
The following checklist is to be used as a tool during the faculty discussion of individual graduate student qualifications, nominally during the May faculty meeting. This document is to be signed by the MSE department head and will be added to the student’s file. Please circle the appropriate option for each statement.
1. Academic Performance
(a) Does the candidate have a core QPA of at least 3.0, and a two-semester QPA of at least 3.0?1 YES / NO
(b) [if answer to question 1.b is NO]
The candidate’s academic performance must be discussed by the faculty. All the candidate’s grades should be made available for this discussion.
2. Research Performance
(a) Does the candidate have a research grade no lower than B-? YES / NO (b) [if answer to question 2.a is NO]
The candidate’s research performance must be discussed by the faculty. The candidate’s Annual Report should be made available for this discussion.
3. Summary of discussions:
(a) Is the candidate’s academic performance sufficient? YES / NO
(b) Is the candidate’s research performance sufficient? YES / NO
If the outcomes from items 3a/3b are:
• YES/YES → automatic pass; no further discussion needed.
• NO/NO → automatic fail; no further discussion needed.
• YES/NO or NO/YES → further discussion needed, followed by a final majority vote.
Result of final vote: PASS/FAIL
Department Head Signature:
1 Note also the core-class performance requirement: Having a letter grade in each of the three MSE core courses; a core QPA greater than or equal to 3.0; no more than one core grade below a B; and no core grades of C- or below.
Appendix F: Semester Research Report
Instructions for preparing this report
1. With the exception of 2.B. and 2.C., all sections of the report are intended to be cumulative.
2. Any table for which you have nothing to enter may be deleted from your report. However, please leave the section heading in place.
3. You can add additional rows to any table by placing the cursor at the far right of the table, just outside of the box, and hitting return.
4. Feel free to make copies of tables so as to span pages and maintain headings
5. Feel free to add/delete page breaks (if you view document in “normal mode”, you can select and delete page breaks).
6. Delete these and other instructions in italic
7. Submit the completed signed report on Canvas. The deadline for submission is the last day of classes for the Fall and Spring semesters.
8. Your advisor will assign a research grade for this semester (section 8), provide (optional) feedback, and sign the report on the final page
Name
Advisor
Date of doctoral enrollment
Tentative dissertation title
Dissertation committee members
1.A. Classes
2.A. Dissertation Research
Dissertation Milestone Date completed or scheduled
Research Performance Evaluation
Thesis overview
Final Defense
2.B. Research Narrative
(briefly describe, in less than 300 words, research highlights from the just completed semester)
2.C. Research Plan
(Briefly describe, in less than 300 words, technical goals you expect to complete by the end of next semester. State your main hypothesis, materials, and techniques. List planned papers, conference presentations, etc.)
3.A. Technical Meetings Attended
Name of Meeting Location Date
3.B. Talks and Posters
Title of Talk/Poster Meeting or Event Location Date
3.C. Publications (list the citation information for all papers that have been submitted, are in press, or have already been published)
4.A. List classes for which you were a course assistant Course Number Instructor Course Title Semester
4.B. Undergraduate Projects Supervised Student Project title Dates
5. Participation on Committees Committee Name Your Duties (chair, member, etc.) Dates
6. Awards (list any awards you have won while at CMU)
7. Other (anything else you wish to report)
On this page, your advisor will enter your semester research grade along with an (optional) explanation, if you have a passing grade. If your research grade is C or lower (i.e., a failing grade), your advisor will provide a detailed explanation of the issues that you need to correct by the following semester (in that case, see also item 9).
8. Semester Research Grade
Semester: Research Letter Grade:
Advisor Feedback (optional):
If your previous semester research grade was a failing grade, then you must respond here and describe what measures you have taken to correct the issues raised by your advisor.
9. Response to Advisor Feedback from Previous Semester
Advisor’s Name
Advisor’s Signature and date
Appendix G: Research Performance Evaluation Document
Your written document is an important part of the Research Performance Evaluation: it serves to demonstrate that you can read and analyze background literature; convey the motivation and goals of your project; formulate a testable hypothesis; plan, execute and analyze appropriate experiments or computation; and interpret the results. Your committee will evaluate each of these as part of the examination – addressing these points clearly in your document makes for an easier exam.
Advisor support
The RPE document is the student's own work, and reflects their scientific ideas. However, the advisor can provide reasonable support while the student compiles their RPE document. Such support can include discussion of the scientific principles of the project, guidance on document layout, and editing suggestions.
Start early
To be successful, it is recommended to start writing early enough so that you can edit and revise the document.
Ask another person to read the document critically. Tutoring by the Student Academic Success Center can be useful: https://www.cmu.edu/student-success/programs/communication-support/index.html
Additional resources for conducting literature reviews and managing data can be found through the library: https://www.library.cmu.edu/services-overview/research-assistance
AI use
Candidates must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process by adding a statement at the end of their document, before the References list. The statement should be placed in a new section entitled 'Declaration of Generative AI and AIassisted technologies in the writing process'
Statement: During the preparation of this document the author used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author reviewed and edited the content as needed and takes full responsibility for the content of the document.
This declaration does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references etc. Note that this policy does not apply to the use of AI tools to analyze and draw insights from data as part of the research process. If there is nothing to disclose, there is no need to add a statement.
Deviations from the guidelines above will be considered violations of CMU’s academic integrity policy.
Document contents
The body of the document (excluding an optional title page, table of contents and references) should be no more than 15 pages long, and must follow the formatting instructions (stated at the end of this guide).
The document will typically contain the following sections:
Background & Motivation
Here you will place your project in the context of ongoing research in the field, explain the gap, and state the motivation and goals of the project: Why is this work important and interesting? How is it different from research in other groups?
Relevant literature
This section should present a summary of the background literature that is relevant to your project. This is a way to demonstrate that you are familiar with the literature, and can critically evaluate previous work, identifying both what is known, and what are gaps in the existing knowledge. The literature survey should not be a mere summary of what previous researchers have found; it should be your original analysis and synthesis.
Use the databases available through the CMU library to find relevant papers and sources: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/az.php
Cite all sources accurately, using a reference organization tool like Zotero: https://www.library.cmu.edu/services/zotero
Hypothesis and/or Goals and Objectives
Your hypothesis and/or research goals and objectives should follow logically from your literature survey and the research avenues available to you in your group. The hypothesis is a statement of the likely scientific truth related to your research question. Hypotheses, as well as whether the research goals and objectives have been achieved, must be testable –preferably in a quantitative way – with the research results that you will generate. The way in which the results will be used to test the hypothesis and/or assess whether and to what degree the goals and objectives are attained should be clear from its formulation. It is certainly possible that your hypothesis turns out to be false or that objectives are only partially achieved; this would be a useful outcome in its own right. See Dr. Krause’s presentation on hypothesis formulation for useful examples and tips. A hypothesis should be informed by empirical data and/or physical reasoning. Providing the reasoning that forms the basis of your hypothesis can help your readers understand your scientific approach and more easily understand the scientific implications of your hypothesis being proven true or false.
Research plan
Describe your approach to collecting the data needed to test your hypothesis – whether this is data from another source that you are subjecting to novel analysis, or your own data generated by computation or experimentation. Alternatively, describe your approach to
meeting your goals and objectives and the way you will assess the degree of success. Describe the approach in sufficient detail so that another researcher could replicate your approach. Give attention to accuracy – instrument calibration, validation, analysis of error, and replicate measurements (where appropriate). Explain how your approach links to the research goals and your hypothesis. Discuss potential assumptions, and/or shortcomings of the approach, potential difficulties and strategies to overcome them.
Results
Show your results in graphs or tables, with descriptive captions. The library has some useful resources on data visualization: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/data101/visualizingdata.
Ensure that all axes are labeled correctly; pay attention to formatting, including font size in the figures. Any micrographs should have clear scale bars, with the imaging mode stated in the caption.
Discussion
The discussion section is where you can clearly display your critical thinking skills: Analyzing and discussing your results with reference to previous work, and your hypothesis and/or goals and objectives.
Conclusion
In the final narrative section, restate the main results and how these serve to test your hypothesis. Outline the future work that you plan, and how this relates to the work presented in the RPE document.
References
List the references cited in your document. Use any citation style that lists the authors, source title, year of publication, pages, and – where available – the DOI. Your research group might have preferred reference style, or refer to the CMU library documentation: https://guides.library.cmu.edu/ReferenceShelf/citationguides
Document format
The RPE document (in PDF format) shall be no more than 15 pages long, including figures, tables, and captions, but excluding a title page (single page) and citations. An abstract, if present, must be located on the title page. A Table of Contents is not necessary. Sections and subsections should be labeled and numbered.
Figures and Tables:
Figures and Tables should be labeled and numbered sequentially. Figures should be placed near where they are first referenced within the text. Figure numbering should match the order in which they are referenced in the text. Figures with multiple panels should label each panel. Captions should describe each panel and the relevant visual elements of any plotted data. Plot axes should be labeled with appropriate units.
Font and font size:
Arial (not Arial Narrow), Courier New, or Palatino Linotype at a font size of 10 points or larger; or
Times New Roman at a font size of 11 points or larger; or
Computer Modern family of fonts (TeX/LaTeX) at a font size of 11 points or larger.
Font size for equations, symbols, and table/figure captions must be at least 10 point
Page formatting:
Paper size must be standard letter size (8.5×11)
No more than six lines of text within a vertical space of one inch
Margins, in all directions, must be at least one inch; no text or other markings (with the exception of mandatory page numbers, excluding the title page) may be placed in the margins
All text, figures, tables, and captions must fit within the margins.
The candidate must submit the written document (not more than 15 pages, references excluded) at least 10 days prior to the evaluation.
1. Quality of written document
Score:
1. Clear Fail - concepts and organization incoherent, needs remedial writing help
2. Fail - document did not prepare reader well for oral presentation
3. Minimal Pass - parts unclear or not well-organized, but understandable overall; needs heavy editing
4. Clear Pass - clearly written and understandable; could be used externally with editing help
5. Excellent - well-organized and written, could be directly incorporated into a manuscript or proposal
Comments:
B. Performance during evaluation
The candidate is asked to give an oral presentation of approximately 30 minutes related to their research project. Following the presentation, the committee poses questions to the candidate and evaluates their response using the rubric.
1. Fundamental understanding of research goals of the project
2. Fail - uncertain/unclear about one or more of aims, motivation, approach
3. Minimal Pass - can describe aims, motivation and approach at surface level
4. Clear Pass - clear grasp of project aims, motivation and approach beyond surface level
5. Excellent – clearly and competently conveys aims, motivation, and approach
Comments:
2. Knowledge of background literature related to the project
Score:
1. Clear Fail - no connection with prior work, working in a vacuum
2. Fail - some surface awareness of prior work but unsure of how own work fits in
3. Minimal Pass - can describe and give some evaluation of prior work; can make some connections to own work
4. Clear Pass - can differentiate own effort and directions from prior work; prior work evaluated critically
5. Excellent - deep knowledge and critical evaluation of prior work; can explain relevance to own work
Comments:
3. Understanding the research tools that are used to accomplish project goals
Score:
1. Clear Fail – completely inadequate understanding of research tools
2. Fail – unclear on key principles of relevant research tools
3. Minimal Pass – minimal understanding of tools; little or no error analysis
4. Clear Pass – can convey principles of research tools, with adequate understanding of limitations
5. Excellent – conveys accurate and deep understanding of research tools, including their limitations and uncertainty
Comments:
4. A hypothesis2 for the research performed to data and for the immediate future
Score:
1. Clear Fail – no hypothesis
2. Fail – hypothesis not clearly worded or not testable, or not shown to advance knowledge at all
3. Minimal Pass – hypothesis poorly stated, but candidate could explain how it would be testable; the candidate can explain links to the research plan with some prompting
4. Clear Pass – hypothesis is justified and clear, but not testable; the candidate can explain some links to research plan, and give some indication of how the work would advance knowledge
5. Excellent – hypothesis is justified, clear, and testable; the candidate can explain how the hypothesis relates to the research plan, and would advance knowledge.
Comments:
5. Ability to develop a research plan
Score:
1. Clear Fail – conveys little understanding of the scientific basis of the plan, unlikely to be successful even in technician mode
2. Fail – operating in technician mode without thinking for own self
3. Minimal Pass – lack of clarity on scientific basis of plan, but can explain when prompted
2 or design/research goals
4. Clear Pass – research plan is well-founded; viable plan for future work
5. Excellent – lays out clear, scientifically sound reasons for research approach; innovative approaches used; clear plan going forward
Comments:
6. Ability to produce and analyze their own research results
Score:
1. Clear Fail - minimal effort or commitment evident; serious concerns about ability to make progress; no analysis of results
2. Fail - pace not up to expectations; halting attempts at analysis
3. Minimal Pass - making forward progress; productivity should be stepped up; basic analysis of results relative to expectations
4. Clear Pass - solid body of work, making fine progress and on a good trajectory; comfortably able to explain results and gaps in expectations
5. Excellent - output is of high quality and roughly equivalent to publication; sophisticated analysis of results
Comments:
7. Ability to integrate materials fundamentals that are relevant to the project
Score:
1. Clear Fail – unable to identify or explain several relevant materials fundamentals
2. Fail – several misconceptions or poorly explained materials principles
3. Minimal Pass – can explain the materials principles after prompting
4. Clear Pass – correctly conveys most relevant materials principles with minimal hesitation
5. Excellent – complete command of all the relevant materials principles
Comments:
Appendix I: Thesis overview feedback form
Department of Materials Science & Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Thesis Overview Feedback Form (completed by each dissertation committee member)
This Feedback form: (1) enables the committee to alert the thesis advisor and Ph.D. candidate of potential problems well before the defense, (2) assists the committee members in recognizing common and diverging opinions on the overview strengths/weaknesses, and (3) serves as a useful record of each committee member’s opinions regarding the thesis overview.
1. Is the candidate able to place their research in the context of the background literature and defend how their research represents (will represent) an advancement of the state of knowledge in the field?
2. Has a clear hypothesis (or clear hypotheses) guided the production and analysis of publishable research results?
3. Is the path to reach the stated goals of the thesis clear and has the candidate mastered the skills required to complete the research; questions of feasibility should be largely absent?
4. Are the scope of the research, analysis, and integration deemed appropriate by the committee to form an acceptable Ph.D. dissertation?
5. Is there clear evidence that at least one publication (based on the research presented in the Overview document) is “in the works”?
[You may continue comments on the back or on another sheet]
Appendix J: Thesis Overview Feedback Form (Advisor)
Department of Materials Science & Engineering
Carnegie Mellon University
Thesis Overview Feedback Form
(to be completed by the thesis advisor, kept in the student’s file, and submitted with the dissertation to each committee member prior to the thesis defense)
This Feedback Summary: (1) enables the thesis advisor and Ph.D. candidate to avoid potential problems before the defense, (2) assists the committee members in their final evaluation of the dissertation prior to the thesis defense, and (3) serves as a record of the general recommendations of the committee following the thesis overview
Mandatory changes:
Optional changes:
[You may continue comments on the back or on another sheet]
