Subsections


PhD Program


General Information

The PhD program focuses on preparing advanced students for research and teaching careers in urban and regional planning, urban and regional studies, and applied social research. The program emphasizes flexibility in the design of special areas of study, research competence, and joint student/faculty research and teaching.

PhD students normally take three-to-four semesters of classes, before taking their general examinations. Students with very strong preparations can reduce this time by two semesters. After passing general examinations, students should expect to take another three to four semesters to complete a dissertation.

The PhD Committee, made up of faculty, students, and staff, has responsibility for administering the program, reviewing the academic standing of doctoral students, and proposing changes in program policies.

PhD Wiki

For students by students, the PhD wiki has a host of useful information and is intended to be referenced along with the DUSP PhD Handbook. See https://wikis.mit.edu/confluence/display/DUSPPHD/DUSP+PhD+Wiki


Faculty Advisor

Each PhD student has an assigned faculty academic advisor with whom s/he should work out a plan of study. The PhD Committee tries to match each incoming student with an advisor who shares that student's interests. The first contact occurs in the fall semester when a student first selects courses and begins his/her first year research paper. All faculty are concerned with promoting good personal and academic relationships between students and advisors. If it becomes clear that the match is not a good one, students should feel free to request a switch. Initiating a change in advisors is the responsibility of the student. The student should:

  1. Talk to the other faculty member about her/his willingness to serve as a doctoral advisor;
  2. Inform the current advisor about the desired change in advisors (ideally the decision would be made in discussions with the current and future advisor);
  3. If the issue becomes complicated, discuss the move with the Head of the PhD Committee;
  4. Inform Sandy Wellford, Academic Advisor.


Advising Norms

Below are the guidelines for faculty advisors for PhD students and general guidelines for the PhD students in interacting with their advisors.

  1. Advisor assignment. At admission, each doctoral student is assigned a faculty advisor. At any time thereafter, students may change advisors. (See above.)

  2. Student registration and progress review. Faculty advisors are responsible for approving the registration for the doctoral student at the beginning of each semester, reviewing the student's progress, meeting with their advisee on a regular basis (especially during the first two years of the student's doctoral program), and alerting the student and Department Headquarters if any issues arise concerning satisfactory progress towards completing the student's degree requirements. If the student is nonresident, the student and faculty should communicate on a regular basis with each other concerning the progress being made, the timing to be determined jointly by the student and faculty member.

  3. Faculty presence on campus. During the academic year, advisors are expected to be on campus (unless on leave). During the summer, faculty may meet with their doctoral advisees but are not required to do so.

  4. Financial assistance. Faculty advisors should be aware of the financial aid provided to their doctoral advisees and should help, when possible, to locate teaching and/or research positions.

  5. Recommendations. Faculty advisors may be asked for recommendations by the student, but the student must give ample (preferably two weeks) notice of the need for such a recommendation and details concerning the award or job to which the student is applying, date the recommendation is to be mailed (or received), to whom it is to be mailed, and other relevant details.

  6. Qualifying paper (currently called the First-Year Paper). Doctoral students are expected to complete the Qualifying paper under the supervision of a DUSP faculty advisor, who may or may not be the student's faculty advisor. First-Year Papers are due in May. Students who need additional time to complete their paper should work directly with their paper advisor to come up with a summer advising arrangement.

  7. General Examinations. The general examinations consist of a written and an oral component, with details provided by the student in a written proposal submitted to Department Headquarters that is signed by all members of the general examination committee. The committee must be composed of at least three faculty members, and the chair must be from DUSP, but need not be the student's faculty advisor. The written component is composed of a First and a Second field. A student who wishes to take the exam in fields other than the standard ones must submit a detailed explanation in the proposal, and the student should be aware that the proposal may take longer to be approved than if standard fields are selected. The head of the examination committee should help the student in selecting the other members of the committee, setting the dates and times for the examination, and assuring the student receives timely comments on the proposal and takes appropriate classes to prepare for the examination. The oral examination should be administered within three weeks of the submittal of the written examination.

    The student must give a copy of the written examination to each member of the committee and the Department Headquarters. As soon as the oral examination is completed, the head of the examination committee must report to the student and to the Department Headquarters whether the student has passed the General Exams (written and orals), or whether additional follow-up work is required (and if so, exactly what is required and by when).

    Doctoral students should not expect to take General Exams during the summer months, nor should they count on the Department to complete a review of proposed exams or exam questions that are submitted after June 1 or before September 1. Reviews take up to one month, depending upon the number of revisions required.

  8. Dissertation Advising. All PhD students need to file a Dissertation Proposal, signed by all members of the committee, and to present it at a public colloquium. The student selects three faculty members for the Dissertation committee; the head must be a faculty member in DUSP. Doctoral dissertation members should meet with doctoral students on a timely basis to discuss draft dissertation proposals and plan a colloquium presentation.

    The head of the committee and other members should review the doctoral students' progress several times each year and are expected to provide written feedback on dissertation drafts in a timely fashion. Students should expect to receive (preferably written) comments from each member of the committee within three to four weeks of the date the drafts are received by the committee member. Students should not assume that dissertation committee members are available to give dissertation advice (and particularly to review dissertation drafts) over the summer.

  9. General Publishing Advice. Doctoral advisors are expected to provide publishing advice to their advisees with regard to the dissertation, including when it is appropriate for faculty to be part of a joint publication. Advisors are also expected to suggest when it makes sense for a dissertation to be published as articles or as a book.

  10. Professional Development Assistance. Faculty advisors are expected to provide career development assistance to their advisees. This should cover, at least, how to use conference presentations and other events to build a network of professional contacts. The advisors should help students assess opportunities to present papers and make presentations at professional meetings.

  11. Teaching Advice. All doctoral students receiving departmental financial aid are expected to accept four semesters of teaching assignments in the Department. Some teaching positions may be available for some students during their last year in the PhD program. Advisors should help their advisees to assess their teaching efforts and to identify departmental or campus resources that students might use to enhance their teaching capabilities.

  12. Job Search. Doctoral faculty advisors should provide assistance, or find others to help the student, in organizing job searches and should use their personal networks to identify job opportunities that might be of interest to their advisees.

  13. Post-MIT Assistance. Doctoral advising never ends. Advisees will continue to need letters of recommendation and on-going career assistance long after they leave MIT. It is reasonable for advisees to expect their doctoral advisors to continue to write letters of recommendation for them, of course with due notice and after the advisee has provided an update.


Student Support

The Department Head, Chair of the PhD Committee, and Head of Student Services should be sought out when students have questions about their progress in the doctoral program, and when any individual problems and challenges arise that require advisement and support from a departmental administrator. Specifically, the Chair of the PhD committee is available to address questions about advising and advisors, program design and development, and RA or TA assignments. In instances where the Chair of the PhD Committee is unavailable, or when additional advisement or high-level intervention is required, students should meet with the Department Head. In addition, the Head of Student Services plays a critical role in providing guidance and input on the ins and outs of navigating DUSP and MIT, including the timing and protocols to be followed for meeting departmental and institute requirements and managing residency status and tuition requirements.


Subject Requirements

All incoming PhD students must fulfill the following course requirements:


First Year Fall Semester

  1. Research Design and Methodology (11.233). In their first (fall) semester, students are required to take 11.233. There are no exceptions or substitutions to this requirement. The outcome of this class is a research proposal that can form the basis for the required first-year research paper. The purpose of the first year paper is to assess the student's ability to make a reasoned argument based on evidence that s/he has collected and to allow the student to work closely with a faculty advisor.

  2. Planning Ideas that Matter (11.910). This 6-unit subject, launched in Fall 2014, is intended to introduce incoming doctoral students to the DUSP faculty, while also providing a forum for discussing a range of ideas in the field. In 11.910, DUSP faculty and others to debate key issues in applied planning theory. Sessions focus on questions of livability, territoriality, governance, and reflective practice. The subject meets every other week on Wednesdays over lunch, and is required for first-year DUSP PhD candidates, but the six debate sessions are open to the full department community. The doctoral students meet separately to debrief on the debates and discuss additional readings. This session is scheduled in the Thursday afternoon timeslot.


First Year Spring Semester

  1. Doctoral Research Seminar: Reading and Writing Research (11.800). The Doctoral Research Seminar supports the writing of the required First Year Paper by introducting first-year doctoral students in their second-semester to the many research and writing traditions in the planning, policy, and development fields. The 9-unit seminar meets weekly for two hours. Students are also expected to meet with their advisor on a bi-weekly basis to discuss their First Year Paper's progress and 11.800 provides periodic opportunities for students to share progress on this paper and receive feedback. There are no substitutions or exceptions to this requirement.

  2. First Year Paper (11.801). All first-year students sign up for 11.801 in their second-semester and work with their advisor to complete their First Year Paper. Students are expected to finish the paper in the spring of their first year, though an extension to the beginning of the third semester is possible with the advisor's permission. A student cannot register for the third semester of coursework until the first year paper has been completed and approved by the student's advisor. Upon submitting the paper, the student will receive a grade with 9 units assigned by his/her advisor. Failure to complete the paper on schedule will result in a Dean's warning.

  3. Quantitative and Qualitative Methods. All PhD students must complete one class in quantitative methods and one class in qualitative methods from a list of approved subjects (currently available on the wiki) by the end of their fourth semester.

    (a)
    When a student wishes to take a qualitative or quantitative course that is not on the approved list, s/he should request permission from the PhD Committee prior to enrolling, including a course syllabus with this petition. If the course is acceptable, the student can take the course and the course will be added to the approved list.

    The baseline for approving a quantitative course is that it covers techniques up to and including a full treatment of multiple regression. Qualitative courses will be approved if they offer in-depth coverage of one or more data collection and analysis techniques. Those that are mainly a general introduction to research design, are survey courses of data collection techniques, focus on theory, or that are combined qualitative and quantitative courses do not meet this threshold.

    (b)
    Students who have completed quantitative or qualitative coursework at the graduate level at another university can petition the PhD Committee to waive either of these requirements. To be considered, coursework must meet the threshold indicated above (3a). Petitions involving classes taken at other institutions must include the syllabus for each class and evidence of performance at a grade `A' level.


First Year Review

Section revised: 3/2013

During the second semester, there is a review for first-year doctoral students. Students meet with a member of the PhD Committee and their faculty advisor to discuss their first semester and plans for the future. The meeting is intended as a means for reviewing experience in the program and to establish a foundation for success in the program.

To develop this foundation, students are required to prepare a draft of their Program Statement. The program statement should contain the following information:

  1. Intellectual Focus
    1. Description of intellectual focus and interests
    2. One to two paragraph summary of potential dissertation topic
    3. Description of intellectual focus and interests
    4. One to two paragraph summary of potential dissertation topic
  2. First Year Paper
    1. Brief description of first year paper topic and progress to date
  3. Classes
    1. List of subjects taken in the first year and grades and credits received
    2. Proposed subjects to be taken in the second year
  4. General Exam
    1. Statement of proposed first field and ideas for the second field
    2. Summary of how proposed classes support the second field and intellectual interests
    3. Projected general exam committee members
  5. Timeline of Doctoral Activities
    1. This should include information about the timing of coursework, general exams, proposal submission, data collection, and dissertation writing.
  6. Funding
    1. Expected funding for second, third, and fourth years
  7. RA and TA Experience
    1. For students with departmental funding, a statement of semesters when expected to fulfill RA and TA requirements, along with an indication of classes suitable to TA
    2. For students without departmental funding, a statement of how research and teaching experience will be obtained

Each student should submit the draft program statement to his/her advisor and the designated PhD Committee representative at least one week prior to the review. The committee will discuss the statement and make suggestions for options to pursue. In order to register, the final version of the program statement, approved the student's advisor, is due by fall registration day of the second year.


Independent Reading Subjects

Under ordinary circumstances, a first-year doctoral student will be allowed to take only one independent reading subject during the year. Other doctoral students will be allowed to take no more than two independent reading subjects per year. A student may ask the PhD Committee for permission to take more than the specified number of independent reading subjects. The PhD Committee will grant permission only if the student can give compelling reasons and the student's advisor endorses the request.


Credit Requirements

Section modified: 5/4/2017

Students who enter the program with a Masters degree will be expected to complete a minimum of 72 units pre-dissertation (a full academic year) followed by 36 units for the dissertation. The 72-unit requirement is designed to place emphasis on a student's ability to pass General Examinations rather than on course units per se. Previously, students without a Masters degree in the Urban Studies field needed to complete a minimum of 126 credits before taking General Examinations. Beginning this year, the student's exam committee may determine if more than 72 units of course work are needed prior to generals.


General Examinations

General Exams will ordinarily be taken either in early fall of the third year or in late spring of the second year. These examinations contain a written and an oral component. The general examination allows faculty to assess how well a student has mastered the content and methods of at least one discipline and, at least, one substantive area of planning or applied public policy. All PhD students are expected to prepare for an examination in two fields The first field must be a discipline or equivalent systematic approach to social inquiry. Faculty advisors in each area are:

Fields of Study


First Field

City Design & Development
Eran Ben-Joseph, Alan Berger, Dennis Frenchman, Brent Ryan, Anne Whiston Spirn, Lawrence Vale, Christopher Zegras

International Development
Gabriella Carolini, Erica James, Bish Sanyal, Delia Wendel
Urban Information Systems
Eran Ben-Joseph, Joseph Ferreira, Jr., Dennis Frenchman, David Hsu, Eric Klopfer, Carlo Ratti, Sarah Williams, Jinhua Zhao
Public Policy and Politics
Amy Glasmeier, Erica James, Janelle Knox-Hayes, Balakrishnan Rajagopal, Bish Sanyal, Lawrence Susskind
Urban History
(currently under redevelopment as “Planning History and Theory”) Devin Bunten, Robert Fogelson, Jennifer Light, Lawrence Vale
Urban and Regional Economics
Devin Bunten, Albert Saiz, William Wheaton, Siqi Zheng
Urban Sociology
Karilyn Crockett, Justin Steil


Second Field

A second field must be an area of application. The following are examples:

Environmental Planning and Natural Resource Management
Mariana Arcaya, David Hsu, Janelle Knox-Hayes, Anne Whiston Spirn, Lawrence Susskind, James Wescoat
Housing and Real Estate Development
Dennis Frenchman, David Geltner, Brent Ryan, Albert Saiz, Justin Steil, Lawrence Vale, William Wheaton
Labor and Employment Policy
Paul Osterman, Bish Sanyal
Neighborhood and Community Development
Mariana Arcaya, Devin Bunten, Gabriella Carolini, Karilyn Crockett, Justin Steil

Negotiation and Dispute Resolution
Erica James, Lawrence Susskind

Planning in Developing Countries
Gabriella Carolini, Balakrishnan Rajagopal, Bish Sanyal, Christopher Zegras
Regional Development
Amy Glasmeier, William Wheaton
Transportation and Land Use
Terry Szold, Christopher Zegras, Joseph Coughlin, Nigel Wilson, Jinhua Zhao

Descriptions of first fields including bibliographies (and sometimes recommended including courses) have been recently updated. If a student proposes a first field other than those listed above, it must be described in detail in the student's examination proposal (see below) and reviewed and approved by both the student's general examination committee and the PhD Committee.


Steps in Preparing for the General Examination

  1. A student should plan to assemble a Committee of three faculty members in the fall of his or her second year. The faculty committee must be chaired by a DUSP faculty member and include at least one other member of the MIT faculty. The third member must be a faculty member at MIT or at another university.
  2. Together with the examination committee, the student will usually select a first field from the list of standard fields (see above) and will define a second field. Decisions will be made in accordance with the guidelines specified below.
  3. Students who take a standard first field will submit a brief examination proposal (see below for specifics) to the PhD Committee. Students taking a non-standard first field should refer to the specifics below. Each member of the examination committee must sign and date the cover sheet of the student's proposal.
  4. The PhD Committee will not consider the examination to be complete until it has received a written memo from the head of the examination committee, briefly describing the examination results. All PhD general examinations are given on a pass/fail basis.


Guidelines for the PhD General Examination and Written and Oral Examinations

These are general guidelines for the examination committee and student to follow. Justification must be provided to the PhD Committee at the time of submission of the examination proposal or, where relevant, at the time of the examination for any major variations from these guidelines. Also, if one or more members of the examination committee change after the signatures are received, a signed statement must be submitted to the head of the PhD Committee by the new member indicating that s/he has read the original proposal and examination questions and agrees to sit on the examination committee.


Examination Proposal

The following information should be submitted as part of the examination proposal in approximately the order given here, so that the PhD Committee can quickly check to be certain both the format and substance of the proposed examination are satisfactory.

  1. Format: The signature page is available from Sandy Wellford. The student should indicate (a) the number of days for the written examination (generally five full days), specifying the proposed beginning and end date of the written examination, (b) the number of questions asked (generally three or four from each of the two fields, or six to eight total), (c) the number of questions answered (generally two from each of the two fields, or four total), and (d) the date of oral examination.
  2. Members of examination committee: On the first page of the examination proposal in the space provided, the student should type the names of the examination committee, and each member of the examination committee must sign the proposal.
  3. Description of fields: The student needs to list his or her first field and provide a brief description of the coverage for the second field. If the first field is not a standardized field, the student must provide thorough descriptions of the field (2-3 pages), two or three sample questions, and a good rationale for specifying a new field. (Note: in the case of a new field, students should allow extra time for the review, both by their examination committee and by the PhD Committee.)
  4. Proposed Sample Questions: Students taking a standard first field should submit two or three sample questions for their second field only as part of the examination proposal. Students taking a non-standard first field should also submit two or three sample questions for the first field: students with a standard first field may choose to propose sample questions, but this is not required. The purpose of this submission is only to assure that the examination committee and the student are in agreement as to the type of question to be asked. The examination committee should not use these questions for the actual examination.


Actual Examination

The student will receive the examination questions from the head of the examination committee, or if prearranged, from the department headquarters.

The written examination is a take-home examination. Students may refer to relevant literature and personal and class notes, etc. If the student does not understand a question, s/he may call a member of the examination committee to ask for clarification but should not confer with anyone other than those on the committee while the examination is in progress.

Students submit electronic copies to committee members and may be asked to deliver one copy of the written examination answers to each member of the examination committee at the time and place specified by the committee. The student must also submit an electronic copy of the answers to Sandy Wellford.

The oral examination is expected to be given within one to two weeks after the written examination is completed, and is approximately two hours in length. All faculty members of the examination committee must be present at the oral examination. If the examination is not satisfactory, the examination committee may decide that the student should: (a) retake the entire examination at a mutually agreed time, but within one year of the previous examination, (b) retake one or more parts of the examination, or (c) be terminated from the program. If the examination (or parts of it) is (are) retaken, the examination committee should be very clear as to what is expected from the student and when. The committee, for example, may decide that the student should take one or more additional classes and/or read specific literature. This information should also be transmitted by the head of the examination committee to the head of the PhD Committee.

The head of the examination committee must submit a copy of the answers to Sandy Wellford after the examination has been satisfactorily passed. If the student has not passed the written and oral parts of the examination, the head of the examination committee needs to inform the head of the PhD Committee in writing, indicating whether a new examination will be given and when and reasons for the failure.

All examination proposals, questions and answers will be kept on file in Rotch Library.


Dissertation

Within three months after successful completion of the general examination, each PhD candidate is expected to submit to the PhD Committee a five-to six-page preliminary dissertation research proposal.

  1. The proposal should include the dissertation topic, the importance of the topic, the research method, the types of information to be used, the means of obtaining the required information (surveys, statistical testing, literature, etc.), and a selected bibliography.
  2. The preliminary dissertation proposal must be approved and signed by the dissertation advisor on the student's committee. The dissertation committee must be chaired by a member of DUSP and include at least one other member of the MIT faculty.
  3. Membership of the general examination and dissertation committees need not overlap.
  4. Within one year after passing the general examinations, the student must submit a full proposal for approval by the PhD Committee. Full proposals should expand upon the topics covered in the preliminary proposals and must be signed by all members of the student's dissertation committee.


Full Dissertation Proposal

All doctoral students must submit a full dissertation proposal. In this proposal (usually 25-30 pages in length), the student should provide details on the research design and preliminary ideas (e.g., hypotheses) that will guide the research effort. S/he should also discuss the relevant literature and potential data sources.

All students are expected to organize a colloquium in which they discuss their dissertation proposal before their full committee, the external reviewer, and other interested members of DUSP and MIT more generally. The student is expected to notify all DUSP members of the time and place of the colloquium and the dissertation proposal cannot be approved until the colloquium has been held. No colloquia will be held during the last two weeks of the semester, or final exam week, or during the summer. Check with Sandy Wellford for details.

All full dissertation proposals are available to students on the PhD wiki.


Oral Dissertation Examination

After the dissertation committee and the student indicate that the dissertation is completed, the committee head will ask for the student to appear for an oral examination. The oral examination will customarily last for two hours and will be attended by all members of the dissertation committee. Other faculty and/or students may be allowed to attend the oral examination at the discretion of the dissertation committee. If revisions, normally slight, to the dissertation are suggested by the committee, the head of the committee may be solely in charge of approving the revised document. If major revisions are needed, all members of the committee need to review the revised document, and, in some cases, another oral examination may be required.

Guidelines for preparation of the dissertation document are available from Sandy Wellford. The student must follow these guidelines carefully. The student submits the final dissertation document, signed by the head of the dissertation committee, to the PhD office for signature by the head of the PhD Committee. Students will be removed from the degree list for graduation if the appropriate signed copies have not been delivered to 9-419 by the deadline set each semester by DUSP. All PhD dissertations are graded on a satisfactory basis.


The Three-Essay Dissertation

This option is based on three related publishable papers and is designed to be used in situations where the thesis material is better suited to three papers on the same general topic rather than turning the dissertation into a book. A dissertation cannot be comprised of essays on three totally separate topics.

Both the summary and full dissertation proposal are still required, with a dissertation committee consisting of a chair and two readers. The three-papers option should represent different aspects of the same topic.

Students wanting to write a three-paper dissertation should discuss it with their dissertation advisor and include the projected structure of papers, the same as chapter outlines in a traditional dissertation proposal. Approval of the three-paper option will be made by the faculty member designated to review the proposal as part of the colloquium.


Completion of Dissertation During Summer

Please be aware that most DUSP faculty are on 9-month contracts, and are not paid to teach or work with students during June, July, and August. Accordingly, any student seeking to complete PhD thesis work over the summer in order to be placed on the September degree list must be certain about the willingness of the advisor and readers to take on this responsibility. Any student seeking this arrangement must submit a form signed by all members of the advising team, attesting to their willingness and summer availability. This form should be submitted to Sandy Wellford no later than the Spring thesis due date. Failure to do so may result in removal from eligibility for the September degree list. If this happens, a student would need to submit his or her thesis and hold the defense during the fall term, and would need to pay the pro-rated fall semester's tuition


Non-Resident Doctoral Dissertation

For the first three semesters of non-resident status, the non-resident tuition rate is equal to 5% of the regular full tuition. After that, non-resident tuition is 15% of the regular full tuition for an additional three semesters.

In a few selected cases, non-resident students in the fourth year of their program may be selected as Dissertation TAs, making them eligible to serve as paid TAs for key departmental subjects. In order to accept a DTA students must return to resident status.


Procedures for Obtaining and Retaining Nonresident Status

  1. Eligibility: Prior to seeking approval for nonresident status, the student must have been in residence at MIT as a graduate student for at least four regular terms, have completed the general examinations, and be ready to begin work on his/her dissertation. Periods of residence at other educational institutions may not be counted as meeting this requirement.

  2. Procedures:
    1. Initial Application: Students seeking nonresident status for the first time should obtain and complete a standard application form for nonresident status, which is available from Sandy Wellford. A full (preliminary) dissertation proposal, indicating departmental approval, must accompany this application.

    2. Application for Renewal: Renewal of nonresident status is also made on the standard application form. Renewals ordinarily will be for an academic year (two non-summer terms), subject to a six-term limit.

  3. Approvals
    1. Dissertation Proposal: A preliminary dissertation proposal must be submitted for inclusion with the initial application for nonresident status. Arrangements must be described through which nonresident dissertation work will be supervised by a member of the faculty or a senior staff member approved by the department. Students then have one year from the date they pass their general examinations to turn in a full proposal and schedule a colloquium. If a full proposal is not turned in at that time, nonresident status will be canceled and the student may not apply again until a full proposal is submitted and approved by the student's dissertation committee and the PhD Committee.

    2. Progress Reports: Accompanying each request for renewal of nonresident status, the report of progress toward completion of the research proposal must be approved by the dissertation committee. No student will be granted renewal of non-resident status if considered not in good standing.

    3. Applications for Nonresident Status: Before nonresident status can be granted, each application for new or renewed nonresident status must be approved by the dissertation committee, DUSP Headquarters, and the Dean for Graduate Education.

  4. Deadlines: Applications for nonresident status must be submitted to Sandy Wellford by early May to be approved for periods beginning in the subsequent fall semester, and by early December for periods beginning in the spring semester. This deadline must be met even if a student plans to complete the requirements for nonresident status between the relevant date mentioned above and the beginning of the next semester.
  5. Cancellation of Nonresident Status: When students cancel his or her nonresident status, he or she becomes liable for full tuition for that semester. A student may not submit an advanced degree application for graduation to the PhD while on nonresident status; i.e., s/he must pay tuition during the final semester.