Ph.D. in Informatics / Human-Computer Interaction Track Annual Student Review Process

Doctor of Philosophy in Informatics / Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) Track

The Annual Review

All HCI Ph.D. students will be reviewed by the HCI area research faculty on an annual basis. The purpose of this review is twofold.

First, the review affords the faculty an opportunity to holistically evaluate student growth and progress toward candidacy or defense of dissertation. Students in the program are expected to exhibit consistent progress in expanding their domain knowledge, developing their analytic and critical thinking skills, adopting an effective research mentality, engaging in the scholarly community both within and beyond the department, and honing their presentation and communication skills.

Second, the review provides the faculty an opportunity to provide feedback to students to help improve the quality, rigor, professionalism, and publishability of their scholarly work.

The Annual Review Committee

All tenured and tenure-track HCI faculty will serve as members of the annual review committee.

Research Portfolio

Each year, all students in the Ph.D. program will submit a portfolio reflecting their academic progress over the course of the previous year.

1. Portfolios should represent a comprehensive self-assessment, emphasizing scholarship, teaching, coursework, service, and professional activity. Taken together, the materials submitted as part of a student’s portfolio should summarize a year of work and include an overview of the student’s progress on their plan of study.

2. The documents to submit as part of the Yearly Research Portfolio are the following:

   1. Research Statement, which should combine (i) a summary of your research agenda, and (ii) reflection on your progress towards the next major milestone in the program (qualifying exams, proposal, or defense).

      • Research Agenda (1-2 pages) describing:

        • The major research questions you aim to answer through your work
        • Your methodological approach and positioning within the field of HCI

      • Research Self-Assessment (1-2 pages), describing:

        • Research goals for the upcoming year, and plan for accomplishing them
        • Areas you feel strong in, and areas you feel you need to grow in for the next semester. Please discuss both academic research development and general professional development

   2. Up-to-date Curriculum Vitae, clearly identifying new accomplishments in the last year, including:

      • Faculty advisor(s), committee members, and selected minor degree (if decided)
      • Progress with respect to the Ph.D. Plan of Study, including completed coursework
      • New accomplishments, including:
         
        • Generated scholarship (e.g., publications, presentations, studies planned, in progress, or completed, contributions to research grants)
        • Teaching activity (if any)
        • Contribution to service (school/dept, profession, organizations)

3. Copy of all proposals and publications submitted or in preparation during the previous year

You are expected to share with your Ph.D. advisor a full draft of your portfolio at least two weeks before the submission deadline for feedback and guidance.

Each document must also indicate clearly the student’s name, the current research advisor, and the semester of first enrollment in the program.

As part of the annual review process, faculty may ask the candidate to provide additional information or clarification as necessary.

Results and Dates

1. Possible outcomes for the annual review are satisfactory or unsatisfactory. An unsatisfactory review indicates that the student is not demonstrating adequate progress and is expected to complete a follow-up review with the faculty prior to the beginning of classes of the subsequent fall semester to correct any problems identified as part of the review. Multiple unsatisfactory reviews may result in suspension of financial support or dismissal from the program.
2. The faculty will convene the annual review committee within 2–3 weeks of the portfolio submission deadline, with the review taking place mid- to late-May.
3. Each student will be notified in writing of their review results and provided with feedback about their portfolio materials shortly following the conclusion of the review committee meeting (typically, on or before June 1). If a follow-up review is required due to an unsatisfactory outcome, the student will be notified of the date of the follow-up review and the specific requirements that they must meet for reinstatement to satisfactory standing as part of this written notification.

First-Year Review

Students completing their first year in the Ph.D. program will receive a more thorough review in order to provide them with early feedback on their ability to perform successfully in a Ph.D. program.

In order to provide first-year students with more time to settle into the program and gain experience participating as a member of one (or more) research group(s), the annual review for first-year students will take place at the end of the summer term (instead of the beginning). This extended submission deadline provides students an opportunity to include work completed as part of research rotations or independent study courses in their portfolio materials.

Research Portfolio

1. A research portfolio should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the instructions for a typical annual review (see above).
2. First-year students are expected to include at least one research manuscript of publishable quality in their portfolio. It is not necessary that this manuscript has been published by the time the first-year review takes place.

Oral Research Presentation

As part of the first-year review, each student will give a 15-minute oral presentation of the research included in his or her portfolio to the members of the HCI research faculty. This presentation should clearly communicate the student’s role in and specific contributions to one (or more) research project(s) completed during his or her first year in the program.

Students should be prepared to answer questions about their research from the faculty at the conclusion of their presentation. At the end of the oral presentation, students will have the opportunity to ask questions to the faculty.

As part of the review process, faculty may ask the candidate to provide additional information or clarification as necessary.

Results and Dates

1. Possible outcomes for the first-year review are satisfactory or unsatisfactory. An unsatisfactory review indicates that the student is not demonstrating adequate progress and is expected to complete a follow-up review with the faculty prior to the end of the fall semester (second-year) to correct any problems identified as part of the review. A second unsatisfactory supplemental review may result in suspension of financial support or dismissal from the program.
2. First-year student research portfolios should be submitted electronically to the graduate program coordinator, Elizabeth Cassell (cassell@iu.edu) no later than August 1.
3. In consultation with first-year students and their advisors, dates will be set for students to give their oral research presentations.
4. Students will be notified in writing of their review results and provided with feedback about their portfolio materials shortly following the completion of the oral presentation. If a follow-up review is required due to an unsatisfactory outcome, the student will be notified of the date of the follow-up review and the specific requirements that they must meet for reinstatement to satisfactory standing as part of this written notification.

For any question on the annual review process, please refer to the chair of the Department of Human-Centered Computing, Dr. Andrew Miller (andrewm@iu.edu).