Program

Requirements

Note that the following timeline applies to the direct-entry PhD degree program. Students in the PhD four-year track should follow starting from Year 2 exclusive of course requirements. (There is no minimum course requirement in the four-year program except for courses deemed necessary by the student’s PhD supervisory committee.)

Year 1

Two Required Research Courses
AST1501Y– Introduction to Research (1.0 FCE) – spans the fall and winter sessions and
AST1500Y– Directed Research (1.0 FCE) – summer session (Note that summer session courses will be available for enrollment in April.)
Each research project is in a separate area and under the supervision of a different faculty member. To help identify potential supervisors for the directed research courses, the first phase of AST1501Y is a series of informal research talks with various faculty members.
Students will identify and contact potential research project advisers. Any research faculty member of the Department, Dunlap, or CITA is eligible to serve as an adviser. Postdoctoral fellows may serve as a co-adviser.
Projects should be feasible and interesting, clearly defined, and ultimately publishable. Each research course culminates with a final report (ApJ Letter length or actual draft of paper for submission) and project presentation.

Graduate Course Electives
It is recommended that two of the required five graduate electives are completed in the first year.

Year 2

Graduate Course Electives
Continuation of the graduate elective coursework with a nominal completion time of by end of the second year. Please note that the maximum carry forward for completion in the subsequent year is 0.5 FCE.

PhD Supervisor Arrangement (Deadline: 1st week of September)
This arrangement is especially important as it not only impacts progress/status in the program but is also tied to funding starting in the second year which is in part provided by a research assistantship. (This is just a formal classification for stipendiary funds paid by a supervisor toward advancement of research goals for the doctoral degree. This may include research collaboration with the supervisor or others, developing techniques and methodologies, or gaining knowledge of scientific or scholarly ideas or materials.)
When the PhD supervisor arrangement is finalized, please email the graduate administrator with a copy to grad.coord@astro.utoronto.ca and supervisor.

Formation of PhD Supervisory Committee + Thesis Topic (Deadline: December 15th)
Once the supervisor arrangement is established, the student and supervisor should start to confer on the composition of the PhD Supervisory Committee which is comprised of the supervisor and two other faculty members. The supervisor should approach the agreed upon committee members to serve in this capacity. As well,  a thesis topic should be in place by this time. Please email the graduate administrator to confirm the composition of the supervisory committee with a copy to grad.coord@astro.utoronto.ca and supervisor.

PhD Supervisory Committee Meeting (Deadline: March 31st)
For this first meeting, a 3-4 page proposal (that includes an approximate thesis completion timeline) is submitted to the committee a minimum of three business days in advance. As part of the discussion, the student will present the proposal and will be provided feedback and advice by the committee. This meeting is ungraded and really just a launching point toward the thesis qualifier.
Note that the meeting should include consultation on the composition of the thesis qualifier quorum. The quorum is comprised of the supervisory committee and two additional faculty members not closely associated with the thesis project.
Dependent on where you are in the process, there may be a follow-up meeting with your committee before the thesis qualifier to discuss any central points raised during the March meeting.

PhD Qualifying Exams

General Knowledge Literature Qualifying Exams

Students take four sections of the Literature Qualifying exams, on four distinct topics with completion of all sections by the end of Year 2. The topics will be selected by the student as tied to the elective graduate course material. Typically, the exams are taken in parallel to the corresponding course but are not restricted to this timeline. As well, a student is not required to enroll in the corresponding course in order to be eligible to select the exam topic.

Thesis Qualifying Exam (June + July)

The candidate is required to prepare a written PhD thesis proposal (often on a theme growing out of one of the first-year research courses, but not necessarily) and defend it in an oral examination conducted by a panel of faculty members.
The exam begins with a 20-25 minute presentation outlining the proposed thesis, including scientific motivation, techniques, feasibility, and a proposed schedule. The presentation is followed by at least one and typically two rounds of questioning by the examination committee. Each questioner will typically ask questions for approximately 10 minutes in each round. Occasional follow-up questions that occur out of sequence from other examiners are permitted. The exam is generally expected to be complete at the end of 2 hours; 3 hours is the absolute maximum time limit.

Note that the exam date should be arranged by the and supervisor in coordination with the exam committee after the general knowledge part is complete. The deadline for completion of the thesis qualifying exam is July 31st.

AST4000Y Research Course Series
Students commence the AST4000Y Research course series in the summer session of Year 2 with enrollment in AST4002Y. (Note that summer session course enrollment will open in April.) AST4002Y corresponds to the completion of PhD qualifying examinations: general knowledge and thesis proposal. This carries course weight (1.0 FCE) and is graded. The default grade for successful completion of the qualifying exams is an A.

Years 3→5

Supervisory Committee Meetings
The department requires students in their third year and above to hold PhD supervisory committee meetings twice a year: in October and April of each academic year which is tied to enrollment in the AST4000Y Research course series. The AST4000Y sequence continues with enrollment each fall session starting with AST4003Y and is incremented by one digit each subsequent year through Year 5 – e.g. AST4004Y, 4005Y. The course spans the fall and winter sessions and is associated with thesis research progress. It carries course weight (1.0 FCE) and is graded  based on the average of the two PhD supervisory committee meetings. The default grades for committee meetings are A (satisfactory progress), A- (mainly satisfactory progress with a few stumbling blocks), B+ (less than satisfactory progress with significant stumbling blocks),  and B (unsatisfactory progress). If a student receives two B’s in a row, the student will be required to withdraw from the program. Please refer to the Supervisory Committee page for full details.

Achieving PhD Candidacy
Students are expected to have completed all requirements for the PhD degree exclusive of thesis research within the third year of registration. The notation “Candidacy Achieved” will appear on the transcript of the student who has completed these program requirements.

General Program Requirements

Note that these are applicable for all years.

Colloquia and Seminar Series

Students are expected to attend seminars and the Wednesday weekly colloquia series arranged by the Department and Dunlap (no academic credit or marks are given).

Good Academic Standing
In  accord with the School of Graduate Studies policy, you are required to remain in “good standing” in your graduate program and to make “satisfactory progress” toward the completion of your degree requirements.
Satisfactory progress refers to the timeliness of progression through degree requirements such as course work, examinations, and research.

Eligibility for funding and registration in the program may be affected if you do not remain in good standing or if you do not make satisfactory progress, so it is important to meet with your supervisor regularly.

Registration
Students are normally expected to be registered on campus full-time for the duration of their program. In order to activate registration status for the year, either the tuition and fees need to be deferred or a minimum payment made. (Tuition and fees for the academic year are posted to Student Accounts by mid-July.)
Students within the funded cohort are automatically eligible to defer tuition and fees through ACORN.

The deferral process allows the postponement of payment until April 30th of the current academic year (without penalty). Students outside the funded cohort should consult with the graduate administrator to determine deferral eligibility. For full details, please refer to Tuition and Fees.
Note that enrollment in courses does not activate your full-time registration status.

The PhD Committee

Students will identify and contact potential thesis supervisors. Any research faculty member of the Department, Dunlap, or CITA can serve as a supervisor. The supervisor arrangement should be finalized by September 3rd of the 2nd year.

Once the supervisor is established, the student and supervisor should start to confer on the composition of the PhD Supervisory Committee which is comprised of the supervisor and two other faculty members, not all of whom need to be in the same area of specialization as the student. (In instances where there is a co-supervisor arrangement, two other faculty members are still required for the composition of the committee.) The supervisor should approach the agreed upon committee members to serve in this capacity. The supervisory committee arrangement should be finalized by December 15th of the 2nd year.

Supervisory Committee Meetings

The department requires students in their third year and above to hold PhD supervisory committee meetings twice a year, in October and April of each academic year, which is tied to enrollment in the AST4000Y Research course series, starting with AST4003Y and is incremented by one digit each subsequent year through Year 5 – e.g. AST4004Y, 4005Y. The course spans the fall and winter sessions and is associated with thesis research progress. It carries course weight (1.0 FCE) and is graded  based on the average of the two PhD supervisory committee meetings.

The default grades for committee meetings are A (satisfactory progress), A- (mainly satisfactory progress with a few stumbling blocks), B+ (less than satisfactory progress with significant stumbling blocks), and B (unsatisfactory progress). If a student receives two B’s in a row, the student will be required to withdraw from the program.

If a supervisory committee meeting requirement is not satisfied, a default grade of B will be assigned in the given session (unless there are extenuating circumstances and you have petitioned the Associate Chair, Graduate).

The supervisor will be responsible for calling and scheduling the meeting and for ensuring that a formal written report of the meeting is submitted promptly to the Graduate Administrator for filing in the student’s departmental file.

The student is required to email a thesis progress report to the committee at least three business days in advance of the meeting. The report should summarize thesis research progress, provide an outline of pending work, analysis of critical areas and possible difficulties (2-3 pages maximum) and a timeline of progress toward the PhD with clearly defined plans for completion of the thesis. Any significant changes or anticipated delays should be detailed. For students who intend to continue beyond the funded cohort, it is extremely important to discuss this with your supervisor, as this decision directly impacts them and their research group. Students in the 4th year or above should also submit a current CV in order that the committee be up to date on publications, conference attendance, etc.

The report of the supervisory committee meeting should contain the following items and be emailed to astro.grad@utoronto.ca with a copy to the student and grad.coord@astro.utoronto.ca

• indicate those present;
• thesis progress grade;
• an honest assessment of the student’s progress toward the degree, which should be discussed in the meeting — especially for fourth-year students and up;
• timeline to completion (provided in student progress report);
• if there are any substantive issues, then the committee should summarize concerns/challenges and proposed action.

Please note the following on Good Standing & Satisfactory Progress from the School of Graduate Studies:

Your eligibility for funding and registration in the program may be affected if you do not remain in good standing or if you do not make satisfactory progress, so it is important to meet with your supervisor regularly.

PHD Qualifying Examinations

The PhD Qualifying Examinations are comprised of two parts: literature-based general qualifier and thesis proposal. Both parts must be successfully completed in order to continue in the doctoral program.

Literature-Based General Qualifying Examination

Purpose

The ability to understand and put into context research literature is key to a successful PhD and research career.

Students will demonstrate their ability to effectively use recently learned course material to develop and showcase an in-depth understanding of the contents of a specific research article. The article will address topics that are directly related to the course for which the literature qualifier section is taken.

Students must successfully complete four sections (out of five) of the literature qualifier exams each on a distinct topic with completion of all sections by the end of year 2. Note that for students in the PhD 4-year track, one out of the five sections may be deferred with a deadline of January 31st of year 2. Please see Retakes (below) about the four out five sections.

As a general rule, at least three of the literature qualifiers that are successfully completed must be associated with AST graduate elective courses (0.5 FCE) or JAS1101. Currently, only PHY1483 Relativity Theory I is accepted as a non-AST/non-JAS1101 course.

If three or more students are taking another course outside of the department (that is approved for graduate elective credit), we will consider offering a lit qual for it following the term in which it is taught as long as it is well aligned with the objectives of the literature qualifier.

The topics will be selected by the student as tied to the elective graduate course material.  Enrollment in the corresponding course is not, however, a requirement for eligibility to select an exam topic.

Format

The literature qualifer is an oral examination. Each exam will typically last 30-45 minutes, and no more than 1 hour.

The student presentation will start with a brief summary description of what the article is about and what are, in the student’s opinion, the key results worth highlighting. This should not take more than 3-5 minutes (uninterrupted).

Examiners will take turn in asking questions. One or (a max of two) follow-up questions are permitted. The exam chair is tasked with making sure that the nature of questioning remains within the bounds of the general guidelines described in this document. In particular, expert questions that could prove challenging to a general professional astronomer are beyond the scope of this examination.

The students can then start elaborating on their summary, discussing for example the methodology adopted, assumptions made, some essential figures and key results. As this proceeds, the exam committee members will pose questions to evaluate the depth of understanding of the student. It should be expected that the vast majority of the examination time will be devoted to questions (and follow-up), rather than a more linear presentation by the student.

During the examination, the student is welcome to use a board as needed, but there will be no slide presentation. Instead, the discussion format would typically correspond to that realized more informally in a journal club.

Rubric and Evaluation

For each question (including the follow-ups) asked during the examination, each examiner will evaluate the student’s response on the following scale:

• 0 — Question was not answered, or misunderstood even after attempt at clarifying with a follow-up question.
• 1 — Answer was not satisfactory (lacking in depth, superficial, etc.).
• 2 — Answer was satisfactory (acceptable level of understanding).
• 3 — Answer demonstrated an in-depth understanding of the concept being evaluated.

Immediately after each exam, examiners will consider the exam and arrive together at a consensus score. A mean score of 1.5 or higher (mean between the average of their original scores and the consensus score) is considered passing.

The exam chair is tasked with making sure that the evaluation proceeds according to these guidelines and with communicating the final grade to the associate chair, graduate and graduate adminstrator. A brief outline of issues that may have occurred during the examination, if any, is also expected to be sent.

The student may pass, pass conditionally, or fail the exam. Conditional passes are considered an option if it is felt by the committee that a deficiency exposed in the exam is not widespread, and that it can be rectified by satisfactory performance in one or two more courses or by other remedial activity (defined by the examination committee). The schedule for completion of the conditions is similarly at the discretion of the committee but must be clearly defined.

Retakes

A student, who fails a specific literature qualifier section, will be allowed to retake it once, on a different article than the one selected for the first examination.  If the retake results in a fail, the student will add a fifth section to complete four out five literature qualifiying exams. There is no need to take a fifth section if four have already been successfully completed. All retakes must be completed by January 31st of the third year.

Schedule

AST1410/1420/1430/1440/JAS1101 will be offered every qual session (so twice per year), regardless of whether the course has been taught or not to allow pacing of the literature qualifiers.

Any other 0.5 FCE astro graduate elective course will be offered in the qualifier session corresponding to the term in which it is taught.

The PHY1483 Relativity Theory I qualifier may be taken in either qualifier session.

Qualifying exam committee members make their availability known 1-2 months ahead of the examination period. The exam period can typically stretch over several weeks. For fall session this may include December and early January. Students sign up for their preferred dates and times for the qualifier section of their choice, on a first come, first serve basis. The detailed schedule that emerges from this process is overseen by the graduate administrator.

Each examination will be scheduled by and run by a committee chair, to be selected in advance of the examination itself.

Each student will identify one research article that they will study, review and present during their examination. The article of choice will be chosen from a curated list of course-related articles (i.e., with direct relevance to the course material recently learned). The student will announce their choice to their exam chair at least 5 business days prior to the examination date.

Thesis Proposal Examination

Purpose

The purpose of the Thesis Proposal Examination is to evaluate the feasibility and value of the proposed thesis, and verify that the student has sufficient preparation in the proposed thesis area to engage in guided independent research.The student is required to provide background material to the examiners, a 10-20 page summary of the proposed thesis, including scientific motivation, techniques, feasibility, and a proposed schedule, a minimum of 5 business days in advance of the examination.

Format

The Thesis Proposal Examination is an oral examination. It begins with a 20-25 minute presentation outlining the proposed thesis, including scientific motivation, techniques, feasibility, and a proposed schedule. The presentation is followed by at least one and typically two rounds of questioning by the examination committee. Unlike the literature qualifying exam, where rigid timekeeping is enforced, the times for questions in the Thesis Examination are general guidelines. Each questioner will typically ask questions for approximately 10 minutes in each round. Occasional follow-up questions that occur out of sequence from other examiners are permitted. There will be a 5 minute break partway through if needed. The exam is generally expected to be be complete at the end of 2 hours; 3 hours is the absolute maximum time limit.

Content

The examination covers the thesis proposal itself and closely related topics. The student must be able to defend the scientific motivation and feasibility of the thesis, as well as demonstrate sufficient mastery of closely related topics to be able to begin effective research. The exam does not cover general knowledge outside the area of the thesis, as this is tested during the literature qualifying exam.

Evaluation

The final grade is based on both the presentation and on the questions. The student may pass, pass conditionally, or fail the exam.

Pass conditionally: the exam committee may require that the student complete further coursework or other similar conditions. The schedule for completion of the conditions is at the discretion of the committee but must be clearly defined.

Fail: the exam may be taken a second time by January 31st of the third year. If the student fails the second time, the student will be required to withdraw from the program.

Schedule

The thesis proposal examination should be held in June or July of the second year. (For students in the PhD 4-year track, this is the summer session of the first year.)

Quorum

A quorum consists of five faculty members. Typically this is comprised of the PhD supervisory committee + two additional faculty members not closely connected with the project. Postdoctoral fellows may not serve on the quorum. The composition of the committee should be discussed in the student’s first supervisory committee meeting to take place in March of the second year (first year for students in the PhD 4-year track). If there are exceptional circumstances in which one supervisory committee member is unable to attend (e.g. sabbatical leave), and this will cause a significant delay, the exam may go forward. This does not apply to the supervisor or the two additional faculty members.

Expectations for Thesis Qualifiers: Committee, Proposal, Evaluation, and What Comes Next

PHD Thesis Timeline

The PhD direct-entry program is structured as five years (four years for PhD with a prior master’s). The thesis proposal takes place in the summer session of the second year (first year for PhD 4-year track). As such, supervisors and students are urged to design reasonable PhD thesis projects which can be completed in three years.

Please be advised that the Final Oral Examination (thesis defense) scheduling process generally takes a minimum of eight weeks lead time. In addition, students should factor in at least an additional month for thesis revisions after the exam. These time parameters are especially important to bear in mind when a student has an approaching deadline to take up an employment offer contingent upon completion of the PhD degree.

Final Oral Examination Preparation

The first step in preparation for the Final Oral Examination is to ensure that the supervisory committee is in agreement that the thesis is ready for defense. (In instances where one member is unable to provide timely feedback and has no stated objection, the thesis may go forward with approval by the supervisor and remainder of the committee.) Next, the supervisor(s) in consultation with the supervisory committee should strike the examination committee. This includes the recommendation for the external examiner (also referred to as the external appraiser) who is then vetted by the Associate Chair, Graduate with final approval by the School of Graduate Studies (SGS). Note that there are specific guidelines for the selection as prescribed by SGS (see below Composition of Examination Committee).

Please notify the Graduate Administrator as soon as the committee and exam date and time have been decided. Exams are scheduled for 2.5 hours on weekdays starting between 9:00am-2:00pm. It is understood that not all this information may be available at once but the most important piece to allow eight weeks advance time is the appointment of the external appraiser/examiner.

If this preparation timeline is not followed, it could result in delayed scheduling. Note that once officially scheduled, an FOE can only be postponed by SGS with the permission of the Office of the Vice Dean, Programs. Postponement requests will only be considered for exceptional circumstances, more specifically attributed to illness.

For comprehensive details on scheduling the exam, responsibilities of the student and committee, and after exam follow-up, please refer to the SGS Policies and Procedures of the Final Oral Examination

Composition of Examination Committee

The examination committee consists of the following:

• 4-6 members total (including the external appraiser/examiner)
• 1-3 members from the supervisory committee
• 1 external examiner* (associate or full professor at arm’s length to student and supervisor and external to the University)
• At least 2 members not closely involved with supervision of the thesis. The external appraiser/examiner counts as 1. It is, however, recommended that you appoint 2 members from the University (with GFM appointments) in addition to the external member to ensure the composition of the quorum on the exam date.

The FOE may be conducted entirely remote or as a hybrid exam (chairs are typically remote even if the exam is fully in-person; all examiners should be a laptop/electronic device as all votes and forms are conducted digitally). It is the expectation that the external examiner participate remotely unless they are in relative proximity.

*The external appraiser/examiner:

• must be external to the University and hold an associate or full professorship (or equivalent) at his/her home institution.
• must be at “arm’s length” from both the student and supervisor: cannot be a research collaborator on projects or publications or former department colleague (within the past 6 years) or be a former graduate supervisee/supervisor of the candidate or supervisor.
• should not be used more than once in a two-year period by the same supervisor or in a committee with significant overlap (3 or more members).

Final Thesis Submission

The School of Graduate Studies requires the submission of theses in electronic format, Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). Please refer to the SGS website on thesis formatting requirements, submission of ETD, and required forms.

Policies

This page contains information on departmental policies for graduate students.

Vacation Policy

The department’s vacation policy is inline with the SGS Personal Time Off Policy

Students receive three weeks (15 working days) of vacation, or personal time off, per each academic year, from September 1 to August 31. The 15 days refresh each academic year and do not accrue. If a student has an off-cycle program start date or takes a leave of absence, the vacation days will be prorated to 5 days per active session. The university’s winter break closure does not count as part of this 15 days. If operational/research requirements mean that students need to work during university closures, arrangements must be made well in advance with their supervisor, and lieu time may be requested. The personal time off policy is only in relation to an individual’s role as a doctoral student, separate from employee status, such as a teaching assistant. Students must consult with their supervisor well in advance of their planned time off.

Graduate Department Academic Appeals Committee

The Graduate Department Academic Appeals Committee follows the SGS procedures for appeals.

For the Academic Year 2024-25, the following are members of the Departmental Academic Appeals Committee:

Prof. Dae-Sik Moon, Chair & Faculty member
Prof. Rachel Friesen, Faculty member
Prof. Adam Hincks, Faculty member
Prof. Marten van Kerkwijk, Faculty member & alternate chair
Student Member: Phil Van-Lane

Alternate Faculty Members:
Prof. Suresh Sivanandam
Prof. Diana Valencia
Prof. Chris Matzner
Prof. Juan Mena-Parra
Student Member: Mattias Lazda