Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering
Degree Requirements
To graduate, students must have an approved dissertation and attain an overall GPA of at least 3.0. Students need always to get departmental approval for the courses they take for their degree requirements.
Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering (students with master's in chemical engineering)
| Code | Title | Credits |
|---|---|---|
| Electives | ||
| 700-level courses | 12 | |
| Dissertation | ||
| CHE 790A Doct Dissertation & Res 2 | ||
| Seminar | ||
| CHE 791 | Graduate Seminar 3 | 0 |
| Total Credits | 12 | |
- 1
No more than 6 credits may be CHE 705 Independent Study. No more than 3 credits in CHE 705 Independent Study may be taken with the same supervising faculty member. The supervising faculty member may never be the student's dissertation advisor. 700-level courses may be substituted by 600-level courses if the academic advisor appeals on behalf of the student to the Office of Graduate Studies and receives approval.
- 2
Ph.D. students who pass the Qualifying Examination (QE) must then register for 3 credits of pre-doctoral research (CHE 792 Pre-Doctoral Research) per semester until they defend successfully the dissertation proposal. Ph.D. students who defend the dissertation proposal successfully must then register for the 1-credit dissertation course (CHE 790A Doct Dissertation & Res) each semester until they complete all degree requirements. Students may take courses simultaneously with the 790 or 792 course as per Ph.D. program guidelines or dissertation committee recommendation.
- 3
Students must register every semester for this seminar. Part-time students may request that this requirement be waived for some semesters.
Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering (students without master's in chemical engineering)
| Code | Title | Credits |
|---|---|---|
| Required Courses 1 | ||
| CHE 611 | Thermodynamics | 3 |
| CHE 612 | Kinetics of Reactions and Reactor Design | 3 |
| CHE 624 | Transport Phenomena I | 3 |
| CHE 626 | Mathematical Methods in Chemical Engineering | 3 |
| Electives | ||
| 700-level chemical engineering or chemistry courses | 6 | |
| 700-level courses 2 | 6 | |
| Electives | 12 | |
| Dissertation | ||
| CHE 790A Doct Dissertation & Res 3 | ||
| Seminar | ||
| CHE 791 | Graduate Seminar 4 | 0 |
| Total Credits | 36 | |
- 1
Must attain a minimum GPA of 3.0 in the required courses.
- 2
No more than 6 credits may be CHE 705 Independent Study. No more than 3 credits in CHE 705 Independent Study may be taken with the same supervising faculty member. The supervising faculty member may never be the student's dissertation advisor. 700-level courses may be substituted by 600-level courses if the academic advisor appeals on behalf of the student to the Office of Graduate Studies and receives approval.
- 3
Ph.D. students who pass the Qualifying Examination (QE) must then register for 3 credits of pre-doctoral research (CHE 792 Pre-Doctoral Research) per semester until they defend successfully the dissertation proposal. Ph.D. students who defend the dissertation proposal successfully must then register for the 1-credit dissertation course (CHE 790A Doct Dissertation & Res) each semester until they complete all degree requirements. Students may take courses simultaneously with the 790A or 792 course as per Ph.D. program guidelines or dissertation committee recommendation.
- 4
Students must register every semester for this seminar. Part-time students may request that this requirement be waived for some semesters.
Selection of Dissertation Advisor
Students must select a dissertation topic and advisor within 6 months of joining the program. Before making a decision, students should discuss research topics with at least five faculty members of the department and get their signature on a form provided by the department. The signed form with the names of advisors selected must be returned to the department for further processing. Advisors are assigned based on student preferences and availability of funding. Change of advisor requires consent of the previous advisor and departmental approval. In cases where more than one advisor is directing the dissertation, the primary advisor must be on the departmental faculty.
Qualifying Examination
All PhD candidates must pass a qualifying examination. Students must take the examination by the end of the second semester after enrolling in the PhD program. If repeated examination is necessary, the examination must be passed by the end of the third semester after enrolling in the PhD program.
Pre-requisites for the qualifying examination:
- Average grade of 3.5 for all four core courses and a minimum grade B in each of the core courses taken at NJIT
-
Equivalent grade for the same subject course based on the MS transcript from an institution other than NJIT may be acceptable, as decided by the Graduate Studies Committee
-
Students whose subject courses differ from those offered at NJIT, so that their MS transcript grades are not deemed acceptable as equivalent to the NJIT core courses by the Graduate Studies Committee are required to take final examinations for each of the core courses during their first two semesters after enrolling into PhD program to satisfy the present requirement.
- A student can take the final examination in each core course up to two times to satisfy the present requirement.
- Failing the present requirement is equivalent to the failing the qualifying examination.
Qualifying examination format
The examination is administered by an Examination Committee including at least three members of the CBPE graduate faculty. The Examination Committee is appointed by the Graduate Studies Committee each semester. The Examination Committee does not include the student’s current or potential PhD thesis adviser.
Three months before the examination date, an assignment is given to a student to prepare for the qualifying examination. The assignment is given by the student’s current or potential PhD thesis adviser in coordination with the Examination Committee. The assignment identifies a research topic to be addressed in two parts of the examination:
- A written paper (no longer than 20 pages excluding references; 12 pts font, double-spaced), which must develop a critical and synthetic literature review on a research subject of the student’s choice (to be approved by the potential PhD thesis advisor). The review must be structured as a scholarly argument, not just a list of findings. It must accomplish three primary goals:
- Map the "State of the Art": Do not simply list who did what. Synthesize the current research landscape, identifying the major experiments, theoretical frameworks, key discoveries, and dominant methodologies. Create a coherent narrative that explains how the field got to its present state.
- Diagnose the "Open Issues": Identify the key open questions, contradictions, or gaps in the literature. Develop a well-reasoned argument for why these issues remain unresolved. Are the barriers primarily technical (e.g., lack of instrumentation), conceptual (e.g., a flawed paradigm), methodological (e.g., over-reliance on a single model), or even sociological (e.g., a "groupthink" phenomenon)?
- Propose the "Path Forward": Based on your diagnosis, propose novel and well-justified directions for future research. This must go beyond generic suggestions (e.g., "more research is needed"). It should offer specific, plausible, and creative approaches (e.g., a new conceptual model, a novel experimental design, or the application of a method from a different field) that directly address the identified knowledge gaps.
Key Requirements (to be considered by the Qualifying Examination Committee):
- Familiarity with basic science and engineering concepts: Students are expected to draw upon their knowledge of chemistry, physics, mathematics, and engineering to contextualize and inform the Three Goals listed above. For example, explicitly stating the assumptions, limiting cases, and extent of applicability of a mathematical model used to describe a physical phenomenon.
- A Central Thesis: The review must have a thesis. For example: "This review will argue that the field of X has stalled due to its over-reliance on methodology Y, and that progress now requires one to consider Z”.
- Deep Synthesis, Not Just Aggregation: The review must weave the findings of multiple papers into a single, coherent narrative, showing how they support, contradict, or speak to each other in a way the original authors may not have even intended.
- Constructive criticism: The review must adopt a critical and constructive scholarly voice. This means assessing the validity of common assumptions in the field, questioning the limitations of dominant methodologies, or identifying subtle biases in the literature. The criticism must be based on expertise in the field.
- Identifying Implicit Gaps (Reading "Between the Lines"): The review must point out the gaps the authors did not mention. What is the field not talking about, and why? Where are the "silent" disagreements or unexamined assumptions?
- Creative and Plausible "Future Work": The review must propose creative, specific, and plausible efforts based on the critical analysis of why and where the field is stuck.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Usage Policy for Qualifying Examination
- Permitted Use (Editing/Polishing):
- AI tools can be used to edit and polish your existing text, including correcting grammar, improving clarity, checking syntax, and refining language flow.
- AI tools can be used to generate simple diagrams, charts, or graphical representations based entirely on your own supplied data and concepts.
- Prohibited Use (Generation/Idea/Data):
- AI cannot be used to generate ideas, arguments, data, or complete sections of the report. The content, analysis, and conclusions must be entirely produced by the student.
- AI cannot be used to generate complex data compilations or images that require real-world scientific collection or observation, such as SEM images, experimental results, or simulated data.
Transparency Requirement: Every instance of AI tool use (e.g., for editing, diagram generation, or language polishing) must be explicitly mentioned and explained within your submission (e.g., in a dedicated section or footnote), detailing which tool was used and the exact extent of its application.
In summary, AI may only be used as an editing assistant for presentation, not as a source or generator of academic content, ideas, or data for examination. Any violation will be treated as academic dishonesty. All reports will be submitted to Turnitin to assess the originality of the written document.
The report must be submitted to the committee 2 weeks ahead of the scheduled oral examination.
- An oral presentation no longer than 20 min, followed by questions. The presentation will be open to the public; committee deliberations following the presentations will be restricted to the committee members only.
The result of the examination is determined by the Examination Committee based on the review of the written paper, oral examination, and feedback from the current or potential PhD thesis adviser.
A student is allowed to repeat the qualifying examination only once.
Formation of Dissertation Committee
Within three months of passing the qualifying examination, doctoral students must form a dissertation committee. The department provides a special form. The signed form must be submitted for the approval of the Associate Chair for Graduate Studies in Chemical Engineering. The committee must consist of the doctoral student's dissertation advisor, three additional faculty members from the department, which include the faculty members with joint appointments in the department of Chemical and Materials Engineering, and one member from outside the department (preferably outside the university). The committee may consist of more than five persons, subject to the approval of the Associate Chair. Once formed, the committee cannot change unless there is a written explanation and request from the doctoral student and/or his/her advisor. The Associate Chair for Graduate Studies handles such requests.
Research Proposal
Within six months of forming the dissertation committee (i.e., no more than nine months after passing the qualifying examination), doctoral students must make an oral presentation to their dissertation committee and other interested persons on the scope of their proposed research. The committee must formally approve the proposal within a maximum of three additional months. This ensures meeting the requirements that doctoral students must have an approved dissertation committee and an approved dissertation proposal within a year of passing the qualifying examination. The approved and signed proposal must be submitted to the Associate Chair for Graduate Studies so that it is kept in the student's file.
Dissertation Defense
An oral defense of the dissertation is required after submission of the final document to the dissertation committee for approval. Signatures of all members of the dissertation committee must be received for final approval to be granted. The oral defense is open to the university community and general public and must be announced early.
