vault backup: 2026-04-05 17:46:47

documents/academic/phd_defense/defense_evaluation_guidelines.md

@@ -0,0 +1,53 @@
+---
+type: form
+category: academic
+person: Yanxin Lu
+date: 2018
+source: defense_evaluation_guidelines.pdf
+---
+
+# Department of Computer Science
+# Rice University
+## Guidelines for Evaluating Ph.D. Thesis and Defense
+
+### Problem statement
+
+- **Excellent:** Compelling problem statement that demonstrates the challenge and utility of the work, as well as theoretical or practical applications
+- **Satisfactory:** Problem is clearly stated; a case is made for utility, application
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Problem is not clearly stated; little context or justification
+
+### Impact of work
+
+- **Excellent:** Groundbreaking work or a novel problem; a thesis that will change the literature
+- **Satisfactory:** Solves an important or novel problem; quality of work merits publication in important venues
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Obvious extension to the existing literature
+
+### Technique
+
+- **Excellent:** Develops new approach to solution or applies techniques that are novel to the area
+- **Satisfactory:** Uses established techniques to solve novel problems
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Uses techniques incorrectly or inappropriately
+
+### Content of results
+
+- **Excellent:** Computer Science content is substantial and correct
+- **Satisfactory:** Content has acceptable depth and breadth & requires only minor corrections
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Content is shallow and/or contains significant errors
+
+### Thesis text
+
+- **Excellent:** Well organized text, fluent prose, and few grammatical errors
+- **Satisfactory:** Acceptable organization & text, limited grammatical errors
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Poor organization, difficult prose, or numerous grammatical errors
+
+### Oral Presentation
+
+- **Excellent:** Engaging, polished presentation with well crafted visual aides that illustrate key results; includes a substantial conclusion
+- **Satisfactory:** Professional presentation on a par with a solid conference talk; includes a coherent project narrative and conclusion
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Too much or too little detail; unclear about project goals and direction; incoherent slides; candidate reads from slides
+
+### Replies to questions
+
+- **Excellent:** Complete answers that demonstrate a deep understanding of the discipline that extends beyond the thesis
+- **Satisfactory:** Competent answers that illustrate a facility with the issues and techniques immediately relevant to the thesis
+- **Unsatisfactory:** Answers reveal a limited comprehension of the work and its context