Portfolio

Technically, the portfolio is called "The PhD Candidacy Exam."  Instituted in 1993, it is intended to certify depth and breadth in computer science, and to promote scholarship, research, and professional skills. The portfolio requires supporting letters, coursework, a "synthesis" project, and evidence of research productivity. 

The committee evaluates your portfolio in its entirety when it is due and will make recommendations to the faculty regarding admission to candidacy. The entire faculty will discuss and vote on the committee's recommendations. These decisions are final, so it is very important to begin the preparation of the portfolio early and to solicit the help of faculty advisors. Although the Graduate Program Manager will try to ensure you have satisfied the requirements, you are ultimately the only person responsible for making sure that your portfolio is complete before submission.

Prerequisites for submitting a portfolio

• You must be in the PhD or MS/PhD track
• Your synthesis project must be completed and approved by all readers
• You must have four of the six core requirements completed, including at least one from each area
• You must have completed all past incompletes (INC), even if they are not in core courses
• Non-native speakers of English must have passed the University's spoken English test, achieving at least 50 out of 60 points.

Components of a portfolio

1. Statement of purpose.  The statement is your opportunity to summarize past accomplishments and future goals. This is a chance to speak directly to the Graduate Program Committee and the faculty regarding any issue relevant to your possible candidacy.  Please limit yourself to a page, maybe two, focusing on the key issues and letting other aspects of your portfolio speak for themselves.  
   
   
2. Core requirements.  A report indicating how you satisfied the six core requirements.  If you have only satisfied four of them, you must describe how you intend to complete the remainder within the following year.
   
   
3. Synthesis project.  A copy of your completed and approved synthesis project.
   
   
4. Letters of recommendation.  You must solicit three letters of recommendation from Computer Science faculty members.  Two of these letters must be from readers of your synthesis project.  At most one of the three letters may be from an adjunct member of the Department.  Beyond the three letters already mentioned, you may solicit references from additional members of the Computer Science faculty, from other departments, industrial collaborators, or from students you TA'd, if you believe they will help your portfolio.  All letters should be sent directly to the Graduate Program Manager.  The letters are strictly confidential.
    
5. Waiver of access to letters.  You must sign a waiver of access to the recommendation letters.  It should be provided to the Graduate Program Manager in advance of your soliciting letters.
   
   
6. Evidence of research ability.   A key component of the portfolio is how it demonstrates your ability to conduct research.  The faculty will be looking for evidence of specific research skills--e.g., the ability to identify a problem, to work independently, to carry out critical analysis of your and others' work, as well as evidence of scholarship and communication skills (writing and/or speaking).  Your synthesis project provides some evidence of research ability and your letters will provide additional support.  You are encouraged to provide added information to support your research ability.
   
   
7. Spoken English. Non-native speakers of English must have passed the University's spoken English test, achieving a score of at least 50 out of 60.  (The test may be waived by the GPD for students whose English is clearly fine.)  You should include documentation that you have completed this test.
   
   
8. Other material.  If may be helpful to include other items that support you as a candidate for a PhD.  Here is a list of examples that you might find useful (you might have included some of these already):
• Accomplishments.   Give an informal statement of the two or three things that you are most proud of in this period. Examples are passing a difficult course, getting a paper into a conference, finishing your M.S., finishing your dissertation proposal, etc.
• Honors and awards.  Include student fellowships, induction into honor societies, etc.
• Refereed publications. The typical subcategories are: Books or Monographs, Textbooks, Edited Books, Journal Articles, Refereed Conference Proceedings, Refereed Workshop Proceedings, Refereed Book Chapters.
• Unrefereed publications. The typical subcategories are: Unrefereed Conference Proceedings, Unrefereed Workshop Proceedings, Invited Book Chapter, Communications.
  
• Publications in progress. All the categories above typically apply.
• Unpublished documents. Typical subcategories are: documents that were submitted for review but rejected, various kinds of documentation (e.g., a user's manual), your thesis proposal(s). Include any significant piece of writing; for example, a write-up of a meeting with your advisor does not count, but write-ups of half a dozen such meetings, progressing toward a thesis proposal, do count. A long message about your suspicions about a research topic doesn't count; a five-page document with experimental results does count. Get used to the distinction between writing that develops ideas and writing that presents those ideas with some substantiation.
• Presentations. Typical categories are seminars, professional presentations, and tutorials. Include lab meetings, workshop presentations, paper presentations in classes, paper presentations at conferences, etc. Do not include presentations to lab visitors unless a lot of time went into them (e.g., posters or demos for a major site visit).
• Proposals (in preparation, submitted, under review, and accepted).   Include fellowship applications, grant applications (or sections thereof), applications to industrial affiliates, requests for travel money from conference organizers, etc. Note the status of the proposal (in preparation, under review, accepted, rejected, under revision, etc.)
• Professional reviewing. Include reviewing for journals, book proposals, conferences, workshops, etc. Include other significant internal reviewing; for example, if you spent more than a few hours reviewing drafts of papers or proposals for people in your lab or other Computer Science members, include that.
• Teaching. Were you an instructor, a TA, a grader, or a lab monitor in the Ed. Lab? List your responsibilities, including giving lectures, and writing and grading exams and homework, if applicable. Did you hold office hours? How many students were in your section? Note whether you worked in Computer Science courses or other courses at UMass or in the Five College Area. Note any teaching experience you gained at other universities.
• University and department service (not research or teaching). Include standing and ad hoc department committees, grad student representative, coffee czar, significant GEO activities, etc.
• Lab service (not research).   Include programming tasks that do not lead directly to publications, tutorials, and other things that do not fit well into the categories above. For example, newer students should emphasize how they have contributed to ongoing research; older students should emphasize their contributions to the development, supervision and direction of newer students.
• Include participation in the activities of professional societies, volunteer activities at local schools, etc. Include participation in the activities of professional societies, volunteer activities at local schools, etc.
• Plans. Say what you intend to accomplish before you write your next progress report. Keep in mind that in the next report you will have to say whether you accomplished these goals, so resist hubris and try to be realistic.
• Needs. Say what would make you more productive. Include help with learning the systems, help with course work, assistance from other students on your project, assistance from professional staff. Include anything that can help your advisor or the Graduate Program Director, or others in the department, allocate resources well.
• Self assessment. Say what aspects of your work please you. It is often difficult to write things that sound self-congratulatory, but you must do it, not only here, but for the rest of your professional career. Say also what is unsatisfactory-what you think you need to work on.

Evaluation of your portfolio

1. Admit to candidacy with distinction.  
2. Admit to candidacy.
3. Defer portfolio.  In this unusual situation, the faculty indicates that the case is borderline but hopeful and asks that the portfolio be resubmitted in one semester.
4. Decline admission to candidacy.  The faculty has determined that the student is unlikely to be a successful PhD student.

Portfolio with distinction

• Aruna Balasubramanian
• Nilanjan Banerjee 
• Daniel Bernstein
• Aron Culotta
• Peter Desnoyers
• Zhengzhu Feng
• Zihui Ge
• Bryan Horling
• Dov Katz
• Ming Li
• Donald Metzler
• Marek Petrik
• Doina Precup
• Trevor Strohman
• Xuerui Wang
• Philipp Weis
• Timothy Wood