What is the issue we are trying to address? To determine from the students' perspective the purpose, transparency and satisfaction with the three existing models for the qualifying exams across departments. To determine whether faculty had the same or similar conception of the purposes of the qualifying exam. How did we decide that this is an issue? During the first year of the CID project, both faculty and staff voiced anecdotal concern about the variation of qualifying exam experience across the five departments. There was no clearly emerging perception of the exam's assessment value. In year two of the project it became clear that we needed data-driven evidence to explicate these anecdotal claims. This project reflects that goal.

Results of Inquiry The intention of this study was to determine the extend of agreement or divergence of conceptions of the purposes of the qualifying exam. We wanted to gather data to support a review of the qualifying examination as a form of assessment. There are three different models of exam in use in the SoE: the proctored exam, the take-home exam and the portfolio. The data from this inquiry did not indicate that one of the three models used in the School of Education for the qualifying exam is deficient or a problem for students. However, it appears that faculty need to discuss the qualifying examination process and the purposes of the exam to have a more uniform and consistent conception of its purposes. Faculty emphasized purposes o fthe exam that diverged from those expressed by students and in some cases from those expressed by other faculty members in the same program areas. Expression of these purposes ranged from the qualifying exam serving as a gatekeeper to demostrating broad knowledge of the field. Many faculty, and all the program heads interviewed, thought the exam needed to be more rigorous and needed to be reconsidered. The student survey (N=51) revealed a general satisfaction with the exam although some students did report a lack of transparency with regard to process and expectations. In general students saw the value of the qualifying exam as a rigorous process, one that contributed to their learning, but they voiced concern if the exam was used as a gatekeeper by the faculty.

What is the intended effect of the innovation? We seek ultimately to propose a model of best practices for the qualifying exam which would meet the needs and expectations of both students and faculty. The completed research highlights and promotes resolution. Public presentations of this research serve to promote faculty conversations and reform. The data reveal that the exam should not be used as a gatekeeping device to keep students from progressing. Rather, other mechanisms, like the annual review, should serve such a purpose. We are now working on developing a school-wide model for this review. Below you will find a link to our in-progress innovation of the annual review. What data or evidence will demostrate the effect of our innovation? Evidence of the success of this innovation will be the review of the qualifying examination in those programs that have had the greatest degree of dissatisfaction or the greatest number of failures to pass the exam the first time by students. One department, which had the greatest failure rate in the qualifying exam and also has the greatest number of international students, has changed their process and adopted annual reviews and annual examinations instead of one large qualifying examination. Another program adopted a writing preparation course for the qualifying examination as a result of this study. In-progress Innovation: Annual Review

What methodological approach did we select? The committee decided to take a mixed methodology approach in order to provide a more nuanced account of diverse experience accross the school. Additionally, we determined that both quantitative and qualitative data would be useful. Thus, we designed an online survey for doctoral students who had taken the qualifying exam in the last two years. A link to the survey is provided below. At the same time we devleoped interview protocols for faculty members. Please see the link to this instrument below. Online Student Survey Link Faculty Interview Protocol

What effect will this inquiry project have on the greater field? This is primarily an institutionally based inquiry, however, there is little to no research on qualifying exams in general. This project was presented by Rachelle Winkle Wagner and Marlissa Hughes Stauffer at AERA in April 2005. The paper is under review by The Review of Higher Education.