To demonstrate competency in the area of scholarly activity for the
comprehensive examination, doctoral students must provide evidence
of the ability to conceptualize, design, conduct, analyze, and
successfully report the findings of scholarly inquiry through the
refereed process in print and public presentations.
Each doctoral student provides a report and justification of
his/her scholarly activity as one of the essays evaluated during
the comprehensive examination.
The faculty will periodically review the records of full-time
doctoral students and provide feedback each student. The advisor
and committee must sign off on the scholarly record prior to the
scheduling of the comprehensive examination.
Requirements for Publications
To meet the minimum threshold in the area of publication, the
candidate must accumulate five points as first, second or third
author (Category A = 5 points; Category B = 3 points; Category C =
1 point). If a candidate is a fourth or subsequent author, the
following points are awarded (Category A = 2 points; Category B = 1
point; Category C = .5 points). The rationale for differentiating
between first/second/third/ and subsequent authors is based on the
conceptual and practical contributions made by the participating
authors. See APA guidelines on publication credit for
further information.
Possible combinations: 1A = 5; 2B = 6; 1B+ 2C = 5; 5C =5
Approved Categories for Publication
Category A
Category B
Category C
Requirements for Presentations
To meet the minimum threshold in the area of public presentations,
the candidate must accumulate five points (Category A = 3 points;
Category B = 2 point; Category C = 1 points).
Possible combinations: 2A = 6; 1A+1B = 5; 1A+2C = 5; 1B+3C = 5;
5C = 5
Approved categories for public presentations
Category A
Category B
Category C