progress report of phd research

Research Voyage

Research Tips and Infromation

How to Present PhD Progress Report to Doctoral Committee Members in 03 Simple Stages

As I reflect on my journey through the challenges and triumphs of presenting my PhD progress to the doctoral committee, I’m reminded of the invaluable lessons learned and the transformative experiences gained along the way.

1. Diverse Committee Composition: From the outset, the composition of the doctoral committee struck me with its diversity—comprising experts from within and outside my university, each member brought a unique perspective and wealth of knowledge to the table. Their ability to seamlessly map my research problem to their respective domains underscored the richness of their insights and the importance of their feedback in shaping the trajectory of my study.

2. Thorough Preparation: Meticulously crafting my presentation was only the first step. I realized the necessity of thorough preparation, ensuring that each slide effectively communicated my research objectives, methodology, preliminary findings, and future directions. Despite the initial nerves, I remained composed and focused, drawing upon months of dedication and hard work invested in my research.

3. Anticipating Diverse Requests: During one particularly memorable meeting, the committee members had varied requests—one member asked for a demonstration of my work, while another member wanted to delve into the intricacies of my data collection, cleaning, and wrangling process. These diverse requests underscored the importance of being prepared for any eventuality during the presentation, including the need for live demonstrations and detailed explanations of data-related processes.

4. Embracing Constructive Criticism: I welcomed the committee’s feedback with an open mind. Their constructive criticism and encouragement not only bolstered my confidence but also reignited my passion for my work. I learned to recognize the invaluable role of feedback in guiding the next steps of my research journey.

5. Displaying Previous Meeting Observations: One valuable lesson I learned along the way was the importance of displaying and addressing previous committee meeting observations in subsequent presentations. It was during my second presentation that one committee member suggested this approach, highlighting the need to showcase how suggestions were addressed and incorporated into the research progress. From that point onward, I made it a regular practice to include this information in my presentations, ensuring transparency and accountability in my research journey.

In retrospect, each PhD progress presentation was a transformative experience, shaping me into a more resilient, prepared, and adaptable researcher.

As I reflect on the journey of presenting my PhD progress, I invite you to join me in exploring the intricacies of navigating these pivotal meetings. From preparation to presentation, and from feedback to refinement, each step of the journey offers valuable insights into the art and science of doctoral progress presentations.

Introduction

Summary of plan of actions before phd progress presentation meeting, presentation tips, summary of plan of actions during phd progress presentation meeting, summary of plan of actions after phd progress presentation meeting, email template to doctoral committee members for extension or modification for the work proposed, mastering the art of oral and visual presentations for phd presentations, what should be included in the one-page summary for phd doctoral committee members, how can i effectively demonstrate a software-based project during the phd progress presentation, what level of detail should i include in the background section of my presentation, how can i ensure that there are no surprises for my supervisor during the doctoral committee meeting, what types of questions can i expect from the committee members regarding my research plan, how should i respond to suggestions and feedback given by the committee members during the meeting, under which circumstances phd progress presentation can be rejected.

The PhD Doctoral committee is constituted by the university in which the candidate has registered for PhD. The committe is there   to support and guide the research scholar  till his final thesis is submitted. The committe involves the experts in the domain of the candidate from various universities and research labs. The Committee will evaluate your progress and help to make sure that you are on track to get your dissertation within a reasonable time.

At the beginning of your research, their focus will be on making sure you have defined reasonable and achievable objectives. Later, they will help you decide when it is time to write your thesis. Finally, they will be there at your thesis seminar and defence presentations. Their support as mentors will likely continue as you move on in your career.

Doctoral committee meeting happens usually once in 06 months. Here it is expected that the research scholar has to present his  PhD progress work of the past six months. The meeting should not be felt like an exam. The outcome should be productive advice to you for your future research.

The  Presentation of  PhD Progress Report to Doctoral Committee Members happens in three stages namely: i) Before the meeting:   i.e. Once you start preparing the report for the meeting to till the meeting begins. ii) During the meeting:  i.e. From entering into the meeting hall to  till the meeting gets over and iii) After the meeting:   i.e. From the time meeting concludes to till the next six months before you really start preparing for your next meeting report.

Before the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

Along with your supervisor go through all the comments given in the previous PhD progress doctoral committee meeting. Discuss in detail with your supervisor the work carried out for the past six months. If any issues are still pending have justification for not addressing or partially addressing those issues.

Do not hide details regarding the implementation and pending issues with your supervisor.  This actually helps the supervisor to defend you and take inputs from the committee members regarding the future course of directions.

A summary of  PhD progress and plans should be prepared and submitted to the  Doctoral committee at least one week prior to the meeting. Make sure that you have gone through the report with all grammatical corrections and plagiarism checks.

Send out the agenda to your committee members beforehand, but also remind them of the topics you want to cover before you begin the presentation. If you have any manuscripts published or accepted send your committee a copy of the same.

You should prepare a  PhD progress presentation (no more than 20 minutes without interruption) that includes a brief background of your research, objectives and the work carried out from the last presentation to till date. Without fail discuss in detail the presentation slides with your supervisor. In your presentation slides list all the previous comments and your response for each committee in the form of a table.

If you are planning to change the title of your work getting consent from the committee members is essential. Have at least    04-05 titles which you and your supervisor feel appropriate beforehand. This will ease the process of changing the title immediately in the meeting and the committee can recommend the same to the university along with regular suggestions.

The best way to ensure that your  PhD progress meeting goes smoothly is to meet individually with each committee member to discuss your results well in advance. If you cannot meet with them in person, share your results ( refer my blog on how to write result section ) over email and ask for their feedback. If there are any disagreements, resolve them before the meeting by speaking with your supervisor to ensure that the meeting goes smoothly.

During the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

Before the start of the PhD progress presentation give copies of the one-page summary to other faculty members who are attending the session. Submit copies of the complete report to the committee members including your supervisor. No need to present details of any published work. Provide a reprint or preprint, preferably ahead of the meeting. If your work is software based then keep the demo ready. If you do not have a working module then show the video demonstration of the model. This will help the committee members to suggest future directions for your work.

During your PhD progress committee meeting, you should focus on the last six months’ work rather than the background. Only spend as much time on the background as is relevant to what you will be talking about.

There should not be any surprise slides/facts to your supervisor during your committee meeting.

At your first PhD progress Doctoral committee meeting, you will present an outline of your plan for your research. You can build a detailed description of what you plan to do ( literature survey to carry out,  algorithms or theorems to study,  experiments to carry out, software and hardware components to add, systems integration to perform, tests to accomplish ).  The plans can be represented with specific milestones and timelines with a  Gantt Chart .

Example: The sample Gantt chart below shows a set of activities planned for the next few months for the Research work. This can be extended to any length. This chart helps the committee members to know how well the researcher has planned the research activities.

At subsequent PhD progress meetings you should present a brief introduction (one or two slides) to remind the committee of your research area – don’t expect them to recall everything from the last meeting, but no need to go into great detail. Aim to put your work in context.

Show your current working objective in the form of a block diagram. This will set the boundary for the presentation and discussion. This will help the committee members to focus on the specified objective. For example in the figure below the candidate is focusing on the “Wheeled mobile Robot” objective in Robot Path Planning.

Make sure you are comfortable moving back and forth among your slides.  Do not cross the time limit. Add photographs of any field visits for data collection , or conference presentations in your presentation slides. If you had any interactions with domain experts in your area then add interaction details with a date. If you have visited any organization as a resource person relating to your Ph.D. work with your supervisor then add that details.

Seek advice from your committee members during the meeting. Note down all the suggestions by yourself or ask one of your research colleagues to note the same.  This is highly desirable, almost to the point that you should make it mandatory. Give a timeline of your plans. What will you be doing over the next month, and what do you hope to accomplish before your next meeting in the next six months’ time.

Keep additional slides along with your regular slides. Get into additional slides detail if any clarifications are sought on any equations or algorithms etc.

Additional slides can be presented as follows:

i) The equipment details you are planning to purchase or currently using for implementation.

ii) The Algorithms which you have implemented or planning to implement.

iii) The mathematical model you have developed,  or

iv) Any slides that you think are important but do not have time to cover at the end of your presentation.

Here are some tips regarding the presentation, including time management, devices, backup, laptop usage, uploading PowerPoint, video, and audio:

• Practice your presentation beforehand to ensure it fits within the allocated time.
• Use a timer or stopwatch during practice sessions to gauge your pace.
• Be mindful of the time during the actual presentation and make necessary adjustments to stay on track.
• Ensure your laptop or presentation device is in good working condition.
• Carry a backup copy of your presentation on a USB drive or cloud storage.
• Test the compatibility of your presentation files with the equipment at the presentation venue in advance.
• Close any unnecessary applications or notifications on your laptop to avoid distractions.
• Disable sleep mode or screensavers to prevent interruptions during the presentation.
• Familiarize yourself with the laptop’s function keys or shortcuts for adjusting display settings, volume, etc.
• Save your PowerPoint presentation in a compatible format (e.g., PPT or PPTX).
• Verify that all embedded media (images, videos, audio) are properly linked and functional.
• If possible, upload your presentation to the venue’s computer system before the session to avoid last-minute technical issues.
• Check the audio and video components of your presentation beforehand to ensure they work properly.
• If you plan to play a video, ensure it is in a compatible format and smoothly integrated into your presentation.
• Test the sound levels to ensure audibility for everyone in the room.

Additional tips (from personal experience):

• Rehearse your presentation multiple times to build confidence and familiarity with the material.
• Prepare cue cards or key points to refer to if needed, but avoid excessive reliance on them.
• Maintain eye contact with the audience to engage them and convey confidence.
• Speak clearly and project your voice to ensure everyone can hear you.
• Use visual aids and diagrams to enhance understanding and clarify complex concepts.
• Incorporate storytelling or real-life examples to make your presentation more engaging.
• Practice smooth transitions between slides and maintain a logical flow throughout.
• Be prepared to answer questions and engage in discussions following your presentation.

Remember, the more prepared and confident you are, the better you can deliver your presentation effectively.

After the PhD Progress Presentation Meeting

End your  PhD progress committee meeting with a summary of what you have discussed, common points that you have reached and an action plan for the next six months. Your action plan needs to have “actionable” items, specifically what milestones you will work towards after the meeting and approximate timelines.

A written summary of the  PhD progress committee meeting will be prepared by the supervisor and the committee, and that will be sent to the University. You will receive a copy of this and a copy will be placed in your research file.

Send an email note to each of your committee members through your supervisor to thank them for their time, and summarize the action items or milestones you agreed to. This will give your committee members another chance to give you feedback or suggestions.

During the meeting, you might have accepted to complete some implementation before the next meeting, but you may run out of time or you may not get any ideas regarding implementation. In such situations, have a discussion with your supervisor and the committee members and discuss the challenges faced by you. They may either extend the implementation time or ask you to change the methodology of implementation.

Simply do not wait for suggestions from committee members till the next PhD progress presentation meeting. In order to build trust between you and your committee members, you need to take committee members and your supervisor into confidence before taking any major decisions.

In the meeting, the committee might have suggested publishing your work in a quality conference or journal for better citations. Selecting a reputable journal and avoiding predatory conferences and journals is crucial for maximizing the visibility and impact of your research article.

By publishing in a respected journal, you increase the likelihood of attracting a broader and more qualified readership, thus increasing the chances of your article being cited by other researchers. Choosing the right journal involves considering factors such as the journal’s scope, target audience, impact factor, indexing in reputable databases, peer-review process, and overall reputation in the field.

Additionally, it is important to stay vigilant and avoid predatory conferences and journals that may engage in unethical practices or lack rigorous peer-review processes. These predatory outlets may hinder the credibility and recognition of your work. By carefully selecting a reputable journal, you position your research for greater exposure, credibility, and citation potential.

Visit my articles on ” How to identify and avoid predatory conferences and journals ” and “ Identifying Reputable journals for your research paper “. These articles will help you in getting your articles cited by many authors.

Here is an email template which you can communicate to your doctoral committee members in case you fail to keep the deadline or are unable to work on the ideas you proposed. Please take consent from your supervisor before sending any communication to Doctoral Committee members.

Improving both oral presentation and visual presentation skills is crucial for effective communication. To enhance your oral presentation skills, focus on aspects such as clarity, organization, and delivery. Practice speaking clearly, using appropriate tone and volume, and engaging with your audience. Additionally, consider refining your body language, utilizing effective gestures, and maintaining eye contact. For further guidance and resources on honing your oral presentation skills, you may explore reputable platforms and online courses available in this domain.

When it comes to visual presentation skills, it is essential to create visually appealing and impactful slides or visuals. Pay attention to design elements, such as color schemes, fonts, and layout, to ensure coherence and readability. Utilize visuals, such as graphs, charts, and images, to convey information effectively. Incorporate appropriate animations or transitions to enhance the flow and engagement of your presentation. To access valuable tips, techniques, and tools for enhancing your visual presentation skills, you can explore recommended platforms and tutorials available online.

If you are interested in further developing your oral presentation skills, I recommend checking out this comprehensive course on oral presentation skills . It covers essential techniques, strategies, and practical exercises to help you deliver impactful presentations confidently. Likewise, if you want to enhance your visual presentation skills, you may find this resource on v isual presentation design highly beneficial. It provides valuable insights, best practices, and examples to create visually stunning and effective presentations. Feel free to explore these resources to elevate your presentation skills and captivate your audience.

Presenting your PhD progress report to the doctoral committee can be a daunting task, but it is an essential part of your PhD journey. The committee is there to provide guidance and support, ensuring that you are on track to complete your dissertation within a reasonable time. It is crucial to approach the committee meeting with a positive attitude and view it as an opportunity to receive productive advice for your future research.

Remember that the presentation of the progress report to the committee happens in three stages: before, during, and after the meeting. The preparation of the report should be meticulous and thoughtful, and during the meeting, you should be open to constructive feedback and suggestions. After the meeting, you should take note of the committee’s recommendations and use them to shape your future research endeavours.

As you move forward in your career, the support and guidance of the doctoral committee will likely continue to be a valuable resource. By effectively presenting your progress report to the committee, you can make the most of this opportunity and receive the guidance you need to succeed in your PhD program.

Frequently Asked Questions

Research Objective: Clearly state the objective of your research and the problem you are addressing. Methodology: Provide a brief description of the methodology or approach you are using to conduct your research. Key Findings: Highlight the major findings or results you have obtained so far in your research. Progress Update: Summarize the progress you have made during the past six months, highlighting significant achievements or milestones reached. Challenges: Briefly mention any challenges or obstacles you have encountered in your research and how you are addressing them. Future Plans: Outline your planned next steps and future goals for your research, including anticipated timelines or milestones. Relevance and Impact: Discuss the relevance and potential impact of your research in your field or discipline. Support Needed: Specify any specific support, resources, or expertise you require to further advance your research.

To effectively demonstrate a software-based project during the presentation: Have the demo prepared and functional Show a video demonstration if the software is not available or requires specific conditions Focus on showcasing key features and functionalities Provide context and explain the purpose of the software

Include only the necessary level of detail in the background section of your presentation, focusing on what is directly relevant to your research and the specific objectives you will be discussing. Keep it concise and provide enough context to help the doctoral committee members to understand the significance and motivation of your work without delving into unnecessary details.

Maintain open and regular communication with your supervisor throughout the research process. Share progress updates, challenges, and findings with your supervisor in a timely manner. Discuss any potential issues or deviations from the original plan as soon as they arise. Seek feedback and guidance from your supervisor at various stages of your research. Keep your supervisor informed about any changes in methodology, data, or results. Address any concerns or questions from your supervisor before the committee meeting to align expectations.

The types of questions you can expect from committee members regarding your research plan may include: Clarification questions seeking a deeper understanding of your research objectives, methodology, or proposed experiments. Questions about the theoretical framework or literature review supporting your research. Inquiries about the feasibility and potential limitations of your proposed research. Questions related to the significance and impact of your research in the field. Suggestions for alternative approaches or methodologies to consider. Questions about the expected timeline and milestones for your research. Inquiries about potential ethical considerations or data management strategies. Questions exploring the potential implications and practical applications of your research. Requests for additional details or explanations on specific aspects of your research plan. Questions about the expected contributions of your research to the existing body of knowledge in your field.

When responding to suggestions and feedback given by the committee members during the meeting: Listen actively and attentively to understand the suggestions and feedback. Thank the committee members for their input and valuable insights. Remain open-minded and receptive to different perspectives and ideas. Clarify any points of confusion or seek further clarification, if needed. Acknowledge the validity of the suggestions and show a willingness to consider them. Provide thoughtful responses that demonstrate your understanding of the suggestions. Clearly articulate your rationale if you choose not to implement a specific suggestion. Engage in constructive discussions and ask follow-up questions, if appropriate. Demonstrate your ability to integrate feedback into your research plan or adjust your approach. Express gratitude for the committee members’ support and guidance throughout the process.

Lack of Clear Objectives: If your progress presentation fails to clearly define and articulate the objectives of your research, it may be rejected. The committee expects a clear understanding of what you aim to achieve and the significance of your research goals. Inadequate Progress: Insufficient progress made during the specified period can lead to rejection. The committee expects tangible advancements in your research within the given timeframe. If there is a lack of substantial work or limited progress, they may question the feasibility or dedication to your research. Methodological Issues: If there are flaws in your research methodology or data collection techniques, the committee may reject your progress presentation. It is essential to demonstrate a robust and well-designed research approach that aligns with the requirements of your field. Poor Presentation Skills: Your presentation skills play a crucial role in conveying your research effectively. If your presentation lacks clarity, coherence, or fails to engage the audience, it may lead to rejection. Effective communication and the ability to present complex ideas in a concise and understandable manner are vital. Inadequate Literature Review: A comprehensive literature review is expected in a progress presentation. If your review of existing literature is incomplete, lacks depth, or fails to address relevant studies, your presentation may be rejected. It is essential to showcase a thorough understanding of the existing research and its relationship to your work. Failure to Address Committee Feedback: If you neglect to incorporate previous feedback and suggestions from the committee, it may result in rejection. The committee expects you to demonstrate the ability to reflect on and address their recommendations, showing your commitment to improving your research. Remember, the specific parameters for rejection may vary depending on your academic institution and the expectations set by your doctoral committee. It is crucial to consult your supervisor and committee members for clear guidelines and expectations for your progress presentation.

Upcoming Events

• Visit the Upcoming International Conferences at Exotic Travel Destinations with Travel Plan
• Visit for  Research Internships Worldwide

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Posts

• Average Stipend for Research/Academic Internships
• These Institutes Offer Remote Research/Academic Internships
• How to Include Your Journal in the UGC-CARE List? A Guide for Publishers
• Understanding UGC CARE Journals: A Comprehensive Guide
• Top 10 AI-Based Research Paper Abstract Generators
• All Blog Posts
• Research Career
• Research Conference
• Research Internship
• Research Journal
• Research Tools
• Uncategorized
• Research Conferences
• Research Journals
• Research Grants
• Internships
• Research Internships
• Email Templates
• Conferences
• Blog Partners
• Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Research Voyage

Design by ThemesDNA.com

Secondary Menu

• Research Progress Report/Prelim Document

The preparation and submission of the Research Progress Report/Prelim Document emphasizes your research accomplishment at an early stage. The report also provides practice in technical writing, an important part of graduate training. The report serves as a first concrete step toward the preliminary examination, and the revised and updated version will also serve as the written document that guides the examination. As such, the report demonstrates your accomplished research and an understanding of the project, and is used to measure (and correct) your organizational and technical writing ability. It should be completed with minimal input from the research advisor.

A written prelim document  will be submitted by each student to the Director of Graduate Studies Assistant no later than March 1 of the Spring semester of year two. If a student’s affiliation with a lab is delayed due to not completing the required coursework stipulated in Section C or placement on academic probation due to poor academic performance, the preliminary exam will not be deferred.

The report will be evaluated by all members of the student’s supervisory committee, each providing critical comments and suggestions for revisions, both on the prelim document itself and the Chemistry Thesis Assessment Protocol (ChemTAP) worksheets provided. The report and comments will be returned to the student by March 15. A final and updated version of this report will serve as the written document for the preliminary examination and will be considered part of the examination.

Report Structure

The report should normally include the following sections. The body of the document should contain no more than 2500 words, not counting figures, references, and any appended experimental details. Students are encouraged to consult the ACS Style Guide and/or research journals in their research area for guidance on matters of style and format.

• Abstract of no more than 100 words.
• Introduction section that should state the broad goals and specific aims of the research, point to the significance and/or relevance of the research, and should provide sufficient background to place the research in the context of past and ongoing work in the research area, e.g. the literature.
• Methods - brief section outlining relevant methods employed in the research, with expanded experimental details appended outside the body of the document as necessary.
• Results - this section should summarize progress to date.
• Discussion section
• Future Work

When submitting the final draft of preliminary exam document to the committee the student should also provide a summary of their changes.

• Chem Connect Lecture Series
• Related Groups
• Instrument Facilities
• Room Reservations
• Use of Facilities
• Guidance on Acceptable Use of AI
• Proposal and Grant Development
• Location & Directions
• Safety Manual
• Diagnostic Quiz
• Minor Requirements
• B.S. Requirements
• A.B. Requirements
• Graduation with Distinction
• Undergraduate Awards
• Transfer Credits
• Summer Research Opportunities
• Finding a Research Director and Group
• Requirements
• Registration
• Study Abroad
• Duke Community Standard
• Undergraduate Handbook
• Writing a Senior Thesis
• Appendix on Safety
• Oral Reports
• Poster Sessions
• Sources for Scientific Writing
• Tutors and Chemistry Help
• Trinity Ambassadors
• Lab Rotations
• Responsible Conduct in Research Training
• Teaching Requirement
• Supervisory Committee
• Preliminary Examination
• Oral Presentation Requirement
• Propositional Examination
• Annual Progress Reporting
• Dissertation & Final Examination
• Chemistry Guidance on Acceptable Use of AI for Milestone Exams
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Graduate Recruitment Weekend
• Learn more about Chemistry, Duke and Durham
• Financial Support
• Living in Durham
• Useful Resources
• Fellowship Opportunities
• Student Organizations
• Admitted students
• Defending soon?
• Departmental Mentoring Statement
• Biomolecular Structure & Function
• Nanoscience & Materials
• Theoretical
• Mass Spectrometry
• Spectroscopy and Other Instruments
• Sample Submissions
• Instrument Rates
• Research & Discoveries
• Computing Resources
• Primary Faculty
• Secondary Faculty
• Research, Teaching, Adjunct Faculty
• Emeritus Faculty
• Researchers
• Graduate Students
• Assisting Duke Students
• For Our Students

Writing a progress/status report

By michael ernst, january, 2010.

Writing a weekly report about your research progress can make your research more successful, less frustrating, and more visible to others, among other benefits.

One good format is to write your report in four parts:

• Quote the previous week's plan. This helps you determine whether you accomplished your goals.
• State this week's progress. This can include information such as: what you have accomplished, what you learned, what difficulties you overcame, what difficulties are still blocking you, your new ideas for research directions or projects, and the like.
• Give the next week's plan. A good format is a bulleted list, so we can see what you accomplished or did not. Try to make each goal measurable: there should be no ambiguity as to whether you were able to finish it. It's good to include longer-term goals as well.
• Give an agenda for the meeting. Some people like to send this as a separate message, which is fine.

The report need not be onerous. It can be a few paragraphs or a page, so it shouldn't take you long to write. Minimize details that are not relevant to your audience, such as classwork and the like, in order to keep the report focused; you will spend less time writing it, and make it more likely to be read.

Writing the progress report has many benefits.

Writing the report will make you more productive, because it will force you to think about your work in a manner concretely enough to write down. Any time that you spend organizing your thoughts will more than pay itself back in better understanding and improved productivity. When a project is complete, it is all too easy to forget some of your contributions. You can look back over your progress reports to remember what was difficult, and to think about how to work more productively in the future. You may be able to re-use some of the text when writing up your results.

Writing the report will make your meetings more productive. When you have a weekly research meeting, the report should be sent 24 hours in advance, to help everyone prepare. (Two hours is not an acceptable alternative: it does not let everyone — both you and others — mull over the ideas.) Don't delay your report because you want to wait until you have better results to report. Instead, send the report on schedule, and if you get more results in the next 24 hours, you can discuss those at the meeting.

Writing the report will give you feedback from a new point of view. The report enables others outside your research project to know what you are doing. Those people may respond with ideas or suggestions, which can help get you unstuck or give you additional avenues to explore. It also keeps you on their radar screen and reminds them of your work, which a good thing if you don't meet with them frequently. (For PhD students, a periodic report to the members of your thesis committee can pay big dividends.)

Writing the report helps explain (to yourself especially, but also to others) how you spent your time — even if there isn't as much progress as you would have preferred, you can see that you did work hard, and how to be more efficient or effective in the future.

If your meetings are more frequent than weekly, then the progress report should also be more frequent. If your meetings are less frequent, it's a good idea to still send a progress report each week.

Important tip: Throughout the day, maintain a log of what you have done. This can be a simple text file. You can update it when you start and end a task, or at regular intervals throughout the day. It takes only a moment to maintain the log, and it makes writing the report easy. By contrast, without a log you might forget what you have done during the week, and writing the report could take a long time.

Back to Advice compiled by Michael Ernst .

• Undergraduate
• Master’s
• Areas of Focus
• Centers + Institutes
• Labs + Facilities
• Featured Research
• Undergraduate Research
• Graduate Group
• Open Faculty Positions
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Outreach Mission
• Local Programs
• Global Programs
• Why Penn Bioengineering?
• Bioengineering Blog
• Penn Engineering Blog
• Seminars + Events
• Visiting BE
• Make a Gift
• Current Students
• Annual PhD Progress Report

Ph.D. Student Handbook

Annual ph.d. progress report.

Starting in their second year, students will meet with a mentoring committee annually. Prior to candidacy, the mentoring committee will be composed of their Qualifying committee. After candidacy, the mentoring committee will be composed of their Dissertation committee, which depending on the nature of a student’s thesis may include members of the Qualifying committee. At least one week prior to the annual meeting (which also includes the candidacy exam), the student will provide a brief progress report (3-page max, excluding non-mandatory figures), an updated CV, and a copy of their IDP. At the beginning of the meeting, the student will meet alone with the committee, followed by a meeting of the advisor(s) with the committee. The committee chair will fill out the PhD Committee Meeting Report.

Access the Progress Report Submission form her e.

The purpose of the Dissertation Committee is to provide objective advice and fresh points of view to the student and Advisor. A lively discussion may be expected at these meetings, which is sure to benefit the student and the student’s research. Committee meetings are also important for ensuring that the student is: i) on schedule to complete the Thesis in an appropriate time frame, including maintaining the appropriate balance of experiments, analysis, writing, and dissemination; ii) thinking about and effectively pursuing post-graduation career plans; and iii) at the appropriate time is given permission to defend.

Doctoral Program:

• Student Directory
• Fellowships + Support
• New Students
• Transfer Credits
• Degree Requirements
• M.D. + Ph.D.
• V.M.D. + Ph.D.
• Certificate Programs
• Diversity Advisors
• Academic Forms, Advising Resources and Feedback Forms

Your BE Contact:

Kathleen Venit Associate Director, Graduate Programs 240 Skirkanich Hall

Graduate Student Groups:

Graduate Association of Bioengineers

Graduate Student Engineering Group

• Press Enter to activate screen reader mode.

Department of Computer Science

Progress report & annual status conversation.

The supervisor conducts an annual status conversation with their doctoral students. This consists of two separate parts, the progress report and the annual status coversation.  

Doctoral students who have been definitively admitted write an annual progress report on the status and planned progress of their research project, as well as on any significant deviations from the research project described in the doctoral plan. A template is available here .

It is the responsibility of the conversation participants to keep this document until the completion of the doctorate.  

The supervisor must conduct an individual status conversation with each doctoral student at least once a year based on the progress report.

The annual status conversation consists of two separate parts:

• Academic progress
• Assessment, career and personal development

The first part deals with the doctorate and the research work. The previously written progress report forms the basis for this conversation where all points recorded in the doctoral plan, the next steps and, if necessary, significant changes to the research project are discussed. It is recommended to involve the second advisor in the first part.

The second part is a development discussion that includes mutual feedback and the further development of competencies. This part is conducted confidentially between the supervisor and the doctoral student. A template is available here .

In any case, both parts - the progress report and the result of the annual status conversation - are sent to the second advisor for information.

Te Here Tāura Rangahau

Faculty of --> faculty of graduate research, progress reports.

Both PhD and Master’s thesis students must submit regular progress reports.

Progress reporting helps to ensure that candidates receive quality supervision, make suitable progress with their research, receive access to resources and have plans in place for the next phases of their research. If you see problems emerging of any kind, it is best to be open about them in your report. Where problems are identified, these reports allow for steps to be taken to resolve them as soon as possible. You can raise any issues of concern to you. These might include:

• the type or amount of feedback you get from your supervisor
• library facilities
• research resources
• ... or anything else.

Issues raised in these reports that are of concern to postgraduate students generally will be brought to the attention of the Wellington Faculty of Graduate Research.

PhD candidates

Every May and November , PhD candidates and those enrolled in the thesis component of a professional doctorate must complete a Candidate Development Plan (CDP).

Candidate Development Plans are completed online. Students will be notified by email when each reporting round opens; the email will contain a link to the online system or you can access the system here .

Please refer to the information below to familiarise yourself with the Candidate Development Plan process.

• pdf 101.4KB Candidate Development Plan (CDP) FAQ for VUW Doctoral Students
• pdf 811.4KB Students How to navigate Research Master
• pdf 1.6MB Staff How to navigate Research Master

If you are a professional doctorate candidate you are only required to complete CDPs during Part 2 of your programme.

Master’s by Thesis students

Master’s by Thesis students are required to submit progress reports at set points during their enrolment.

The Confirmation of Master’s Research Proposal is due after one month, the Interim Progress Report after three months and the Final Progress Report after eight months. These deadlines are pro rata for part-time students.

Master of Architecture students enrolled in a research portfolio should be aware that the above timeframes differ.

You can find information on timelines for full-time and part-time study and learn how to submit mandatory progress reports here .

Research guidance, Research Journals, Top Universities

PhD Six Month Progress Report Sample/ Format

Annexure-II

UNIVERSITY NAME

SEMESTER WISE PROGRESS REPORT OF THE RESEARCH SCHOLAR CONFIDENTIAL

Six Monthly Progress Report of the Research work done for the period from 01 November 2017 to April 2018 of the Research Scholar.

• Name of the Research Scholar:  Mr. Daniel Sehwag
• Subject:   Computer Science
• Topic registered for Ph.D. Degree:  Optimum web personalization system using semantic annotation.
• Research paper published during this tenure and conference/seminar attended (if any)

  A. Research Paper Published:

• An optimum approach for preprocessing of web user query.

B. Conferences Attended:

• National Conference – 2
• International Conference – 3

C. Workshop Attended:

• One Week National Workshop on  “Statistics through SPSS and R” at   University of Texas.
• Three day National workshop on Research Methodology at GCW Parade, India.

Name of the Supervisor: Dr. Arjun Kumar

Name of the Co-Supervisor: Dr. Flemming

Description of the guidance                 

___________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________

Signature of Candidate

Remarks of the supervisor on the work done by the candidate on topic:

   …………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………..…………………………

Signature of the supervisor

Remarks of the co-supervisor on the work done by the candidate on topic:

Signature of the co-supervisor

PhD six month progress report sample  PPT | PhD  half-yearly  progress report sample | 1st year  PhD progress report  example first year  PhD | PhD six month progress report sample

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

PhD Progress Reports | Feinberg Graduate School

• Skip to main content
• Skip to navigation
• Skip to search
• Disclaimer open in a new window
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Tweet
• Share with Email
• Share with WhatsApp
• Increase font size
• Decrease font size
• Sharpen color
• Invert color

Login required menu

• STUDENTS & POSTDOCS
• FACULTY MEMBERS
• ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF
• MSc Programs
• PhD Outline
• PhD Study Requirements

PhD Progress Reports

• PhD Defense Procedures
• Courses and Exams
• Academic Calendar
• Assistance and fellowships
• Top stories
• Events & Announcements
• Career development
• Available positions

What is defined as a progress report?

Research proposal, interim report, special report.

• Final Report  

Deadline for your Progress Reports

It is mandatory that you submit all reports on time, according to your set deadlines. For your convenience, you may view the deadlines for your reports at any time through the online service. Requests for extensions for up to one month must be sent by email, a month before the deadline, to your FGS Faculty Coordinator.

Requests for extensions for more than one month must be sent by email, a month before the deadline, by your advisor directly to the Chair of the Board of Studies

• Research Proposal :  Month 12 (Direct Track: Pre-condition to start)
• Interim Report: Month 30 (Direct Track: Month 18)
• Final Report: Month 48 (Direct Track: Month 36)

Current information concerning the deadline for the submission of your progress reports is available online.

If necessary, you may file a fully detailed request with the Board of Studies to postpone submission of any of your Progress Reports.

Submitting Your Progress Reports

Each one of your progress reports must be submitted as a PDF file via the online uploading service .

Defending Your Progress Reports

The Chair of your Board of Studies will appoint an examining committee of at least two scientists.

Their task will be to review your reports and to meet with you following the submission of each report in order to examine your progress and general knowledge of the field as well as your ability to pursue your research.  Your advisor(s) should not be present at these examinations.

As soon as you coordinate a date for the examination of your progress report (i.e., a meeting with your appointed examiners), you should record the date through the online service .

At the end of the process the recommendations of your examiners and of the Chair of the Board of Studies are submitted to the FGS Dean for consideration and approval.

As a PhD candidate, you will be expected to select a specific doctoral research topic (in consultation with your supervisor), prepare a proposal, and submit it to the Feinberg Graduate School. This should all take place within the probationary period, not exceeding one year from the start of your studies.

Technical Details

• Your research proposal must be written in English (unless pursuing science teaching studies).
• The length may not exceed ten pages, not including pictures, graphs and bibliography.
• The font should be Times New Roman size 12, and line spacing should be 1.5.

Structuring the Proposal

Your research proposal should include the following sections:

• Title page:  Use one of two possible formats, one for the regular PhD track and one for the direct PhD track. For your convenience, provided herewith are WORD templates of the two title page formats: Regular PhD Track and Direct Track .
• Abstract  (half a page).
• The subject of your proposed research
• Aims and bjective
• Experimental approach and methodology
• Preliminary results

Your Interim Report should contain a summary of the results you have achieved to date, as well as your plans for future work. It should be submitted within 30 months from the start of your studies, or at a date determined by the Dean.

• The Interim Report must be written in English (except for students of Science Teaching).
• The length may not exceed 15 pages, not including pictures, graphs, and bibliography.
• The font should be Times New Roman size 12 and line spacing should be 1.5.

Structuring Your Interim Report

It is obligatory to include a title page and an abstract. For your convenience, provided herewith is a WORD template of the  title page for the Interim Report .

Your Research proposal and Interim Report examiners, as well as the Board of Studies, may require that you submit a Special Report on your progress. This request may be made of you at any time. When such a decision is made, you will be notified of the deadline for submission of a Special Report. 

Submitting a Special Report


• The Special Report must be written in English (except for students of Science Teaching).
• The required length is usually between one and ten pages, not including pictures, graphs, and bibliography.

Submitting the Special Report


It is obligatory to include a title page and an abstract. For your convenience, provided herewith is a WORD template of the title page for a Special Report .

Final Report

Your Final Report should summarize the main results of your research, and serve as a basis for writing your thesis. Review of your Final Report by the examiners who have accompanied your work throughout your doctoral studies is required ─ not only for the submission of your thesis, but also in order to provide you with helpful comments in terms of style and organization.

• The Final Report must be written in English (except for students of Science Teaching).
• The length may not exceed 30 pages, not including pictures, graphs, and bibliography.
• Setting a Date for the Examination 


Structuring the Report

The Final Report you submit should follow this structure, and include the following:

• Title page.  For your convenience, provided herewith is a WORD templates of the title page of the Final Report
• Brief summary of the main goals of your research (about one page).
• Concise report on your main findings and central conclusions (one page).
• Short introduction to your entire study.
• Summary of the Experimental or Theoretical section, presented in accordance with the chapters that will constitute your thesis. The description of experiments should be brief and accompanied by tables, illustrations, etc.
• The description of results in this report may NOT be replaced by a printed version of papers you have published. However, copies of papers you have published may be attached to your Final Report as appendices.
• Short discussion of your ENTIRE study deliberating on your work as a whole.
• List of all publications that you have authored during your PhD studies.

* Comments concerning the list of  publications:

• Each paper is a primary research paper – not a review, review-style book chapter, or meeting abstract – and was published in a peer-reviewed journal, or as a peer-reviewed abstract in a scientific conference as is customary in mathematics and computer science fields.
• Each paper must be at the published, in press or accepted stage. In other words, you or your advisor is in possession of a formal, final acceptance letter or email from the journal. The following stages do NOT fulfill these threshold requirements: In preparation, submitted, or in revision.
• You are either the sole first author or one of two equally contributing first authors. Papers in which you are one of three or more equally contributing first authors will not be considered for this purpose.
• In case of scientific disciplines where a different order of author listing is customary, such as alphabetical order, your advisor and examiners will determine if indeed the paper abides by the spirit of the above-mentioned requirements. 


Declaration of specific contributions - for Life Science

Starting 1/05/2023, All PhD progress reports, Research proposals Interim, Final and Thesis submitted to the FGS must include a section in the form of a table, after the Abstract, titled ‘Declaration of specific contributions:’.

In this table the student has to declare who collected the experimental data presented and who analyzed it for each table and figure.

If this information varies at the level of individual panels, it further needs to be provided on the panel level. The students are encouraged to include this specific information also at the bottom of each table/figure legend.

In the case that ALL the data were both produced and analyzed solely by the student, the aforesaid table can be replaced by a brief statement. Note that reports will not be approved without including the information mentioned above or if it is only partial.

An example table

1) Declaration  - The student shall declare that the thesis summarizes his/her independent research. If part of the research was performed in collaboration with another investigator(s) and/or students, the collaboration should be explained.

This includes specifying which parts of the thesis describe results from this collaboration, the work done by the collaborators (and not by the student), and the role of the student in the collaboration.

2) List of all publications that you have authored during your PhD studies.

Comments concerning the list of publications :

• The " main publications section " should include only those where you are the sole first author or one of up to three equally contributing first authors.
• In addition, you can also have an optional " additional publications " section, which can include any other papers meeting the criteria listed above on which you are listed as one of the authors, as well as review manuscripts, published preprints and review-style book chapters.
• In case of scientific disciplines where a different order of author listing is customary, such as alphabetical order, your advisor and examiners will determine if indeed the paper abides by the spirit of the above-mentioned requirements.
• 'Iron Swords' Updates
• FGS regulations
• Grievances and reporting
• Weizmann Email

Faculty Coordinators

Life sciences, science teaching.

Planning & Progress Study 2024

The 2024 Planning & Progress Study, an annual research study from Northwestern Mutual, explores U.S. adults’ attitudes and behaviors toward money, financial decision-making, and the broader issues impacting people’s long-term financial security.

Americans have a rosier view of the direction of the U.S. economy, and yet, their feelings of financial insecurity have hit a record high.

Just over half (54%) of U.S. adults expect the United States will enter a recession this year. While still a majority, it’s a substantial drop from the two-thirds (67%) who predicted a recession last year. These more positive economic expectations are consistent across generations, with double-digit increases in optimism among Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X and Boomers+ alike.

At the same time, Americans’ feelings of personal financial insecurity are on the rise . One-third (33%) of adults say they do not feel financially secure. This represents a jump from 27% who said the same last year and is the highest level of insecurity recorded in the study’s history. The Northwestern Mutual Planning & Progress Study started in 2009, and began measuring financial security using its current methodology in 2012.

Inflation is the clear driver underpinning that insecurity. Despite dropping substantially from its peak in 2022, inflation rates continue to weigh heavy on Americans’ minds. More than half (54%) of U.S. adults expect inflation to increase this year, and only 9% say their household income is outpacing it. By far, inflation is considered the greatest obstacle to financial security, coming in well ahead of factors such as lack of savings and debt.

Government Dysfunction and the Presidential Election are Among People’s Top Concerns for 2024

Beyond inflation, Americans are particularly worried about the impact that decisions – or indecision – by government officials could have on their financial well-being this year. When asked to rank the concerns that could impact their finances the most in 2024, “inflation” (57%) topped the list  but “government dysfunction” (34%) and “the U.S. Presidential Election” (33%) ranked second and third, coming in ahead of longer-term worries such as “a potential recession” (24%), “interest rates” (24%), “market volatility” (15%) and “geopolitical conflicts” (14%).

Playing Defense

Given current market and economic conditions, 42% of U.S. adults feel 2024 is a year to prioritize “playing defense” with their savings and investments (managing risk to protect their assets) vs. 29% who feel it’s a year to be “playing offense” (capitalizing on opportunities to grow their assets); and 29% are unsure.

The gameplan for those who favor playing defense is mostly focused on cutting costs (56%) and building savings (51%). Younger generations score higher on adding a side hustle (46% for Gen Z and 43% for Millennials). About one in six Millennials (16%) said that they would get a financial advisor, while 15% said they would buy life insurance or increase life insurance coverage. Among high-net-worth individuals – people with more than $1 million in investable assets – higher numbers reported moving into safe, high-yielding instruments like money market funds (40%).

The gameplan for those who favor playing offense is mostly focused on investing more in the stock market (42%), particularly for Gen Z (52%) and the high-net worth (50%). About half as many Americans indicated interest in investing more in real estate (21%), high-yield bonds (21%), alternative assets like hedge funds and private equity (19%), and speculative investments like cryptocurrencies (17%). Just 9% expect to invest more in gold or silver.

Discipline in Decline

Intentions don’t always translate to action when it comes to financial planning. In fact, the research shows a continued decline among Americans who consider themselves “disciplined” financial planners – from 65% in the post-Covid 2020 study to 45% in 2024.

People are Still Spending

Despite high levels of financial insecurity, many Americans don’t expect to largely pull back their spending on discretionary things like restaurants, vacations and entertainment in 2024. The research finds 59% of U.S. adults say they’ll either spend the same or more on these purchases year-over-year, while just under four in 10 (37%) say they’ll spend less. Among generations, Gen Z is the most likely to say they’ll increase non-essential spending and Gen X is the most likely to say they’ll be tightening their belts.

In forthcoming data sets, Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning & Progress Study will explore wide-ranging issues facing Americans spanning savings and debt, work and retirement, planning, priorities and more.

Read the news release Read the 2024 Planning and Progress Study - The Financial States of America

Americans’ “magic number” for retirement is surging to an all-time high – rising much faster than the rate of inflation while swelling more than 50% since the onset of the pandemic.

U.S. adults believe they will need $1.46 million to retire comfortably, a 15% increase over the $1.27 million reported last year, far outpacing today’s inflation rate which currently hovers between 2% and 3%. Over a five-year span, people’s ‘magic number’ has jumped a whopping 53% from the $951,000 target Americans reported in 2020.

By generation, both Gen Z and Millennials expect to need more than $1.6 million to retire comfortably. High-net-worth individuals – people with more than $1 million in investable assets – say they’ll need nearly $4 million.

Meanwhile, the average amount that U.S. adults have saved for retirement dropped modestly from $89,300 in 2023 to $88,400 today, but is more than $10,000 off its five-year peak of $98,800 in 2021.

Across all segments, there are large gaps between what people think they’ll need to retire and what they’ve saved to date.  

Gen Z: Starting sooner with the aim of ending earlier

The average age that Americans say they started saving for retirement is 31. But for Gen Z, it’s 22 – nearly a decade earlier. It’s also a full 15 years before Boomers+ who say they started when they were 37. Millennials and Gen X’ers began saving for retirement at ages 27 and 31, respectively.

The hope among Gen Z is that by starting to save sooner, they’ll be able to retire earlier. They expect to retire at the age of 60, a dozen years before Boomers+ who say they’ll work until they’re 72. Millennials and Gen X’ers expect to work until 64 and 67, respectively. The average age most people expect to work to is 65.

The research discovered that three in 10 Millennials and Gen Z Americans believe it’s likely or highly likely that they will live to age 100. The sentiment among these younger generations is stronger than older generations. Among Gen X and Boomers+, just 22% and 21% respectively agreed that they believed they would live to 100.

The ‘Silver Tsunami’ is here

In 2024, more than four million Americans will turn 65. That’s an average of 11,000 Americans per day, and it will continue through 2027. It’s the largest surge of Americans hitting the traditional retirement age in history.

The 2024 Planning & Progress Study found that among generations closest to retirement, just half of Boomers+ (49%) and Gen X (48%) believe they will be financially prepared when the time comes.

On average, Gen X believes there is a 42% chance they could outlive their savings, while Boomers+ put the probability at 37%. Across both generations, more than a third (37% and 38%, respectively) have not taken any steps to address the possibility of outliving their savings.

When digging into some of the most pressing challenges associated with retirement planning, the research shows that Boomers+ and Gen X don’t have markedly strong confidence in their preparedness.

Taxes are an afterthought

Only three in 10 (30%) Americans have a plan to minimize the taxes they pay on their retirement savings. Among them, the top 10 strategies employed include:

• Making withdrawals strategically from traditional and Roth accounts to remain in a lower tax bracket (32%)
• Using a mix of traditional and Roth retirement accounts (30%)
• Making strategic charitable donations (24%)
• Using a Health Savings Account (HSA) or other tax-advantaged healthcare account (23%)
• Using products like permanent life insurance or annuities for the tax benefits (22%)
• Making Roth conversions prior to taking RMDs or Social Security (19%)
• Using qualified charitable distributions from an IRA (17%)
• Making contributions to other tax-advantaged accounts like a 529 (14%)
• Using the basis paid into the cash value of permanent life insurance to remain in a lower tax bracket (13%)
• Taking advantage of a Qualified Longevity Annuity Contract (QLAC) to set aside funds for later in retirement (13%)

In forthcoming data sets, the 2024 Planning & Progress Study will explore wide-ranging issues facing Americans spanning savings and debt, retirement income, emerging technology, professional help and more. 

Read the news release

Read the 2024 Planning & Progress Study – Work, Retirement & Taxes

Among American parents saving for their children’s college education, 95% expect to cover more than half of the cost for their children. While about one in three (36%) say they will pay for the full cost, two in three (64%) expect their child to pay something. These are among the latest findings from Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning & Progress Study .

About a third of parents saving for their kids’ educational expenses (37%) anticipate that child’s contribution to be between 1-25%. Meanwhile, a fifth (22%) anticipate it to be between 25-50%.

According to the Northwestern Mutual research, two in ten adults in America (led by 40% of Gen Z) are saving for college, either for themselves or a family member. On average, they expect the total cost of college to be $77,300 and aim to pay it off by the age of 45. Each American’s actual college expenses may vary significantly, based on the type of school, the level of the institution, and the student’s living arrangements .

Among those who are saving for college for either themselves or an immediate family member, 23% are still paying off their own student debt .

Americans’ debt levels are growing.

In 2024, Americans’ personal debt, exclusive of mortgages, ticked up slightly between 2023 and 2024. The study revealed that two-thirds (66%) of Americans currently hold at least some personal debt, and the average amount people owe is $22,713.

The primary source of debt is credit cards , which account for more than double the #2 source (car loans) and more than triple the #3 source (education).

Gen X and Millennials carry the most total personal debt .

In both age groups, more than four in ten – 42% of Gen X’ers and 43% of Millennials – say their personal debt is at or near its highest level ever.

Meanwhile, only six in ten Millennials (59%) and Gen X’ers (57%) say that they have a specific plan in place to pay down their debts.

For people who carry personal debt, an average of 29% of their monthly income goes toward paying it off. That’s a sizable chunk off the bottom line and may explain why people are increasingly prioritizing paying down debt before building savings. Lenders generally prefer that a person’s debt-to-income ratio (DTI) is below 43 percent – although some want it to be no higher than 31 percent.

The urgency to pay down debt is growing. But action to get it under control is lacking.

The Northwestern Mutual study found that 64% of adults say they prioritize paying down debt versus 36% who put saving first. That continues a two-year trend which has seen a growing urgency to focus on debt first. At the same time, the number of people who report having specific plans to pay off their debt has dropped over the same period, from 64% in 2022 to 59% today.

Interestingly, the study found that saving is more of a priority for younger adults whereas paying down debt becomes more of a priority as people age.

The survey also showed that striking a balance between spending and saving is getting murkier for many Americans. The number of U.S. adults who lack clarity on how much they can afford to spend now vs. how much to save for later has risen from a quarter (26%) in 2021 to a third (34%) today – reiterating the importance of a comprehensive financial plan.

Emergency funds can provide a safety net – for some.

Six in ten (60%) Americans say they have an emergency fund – cash or other liquid assets independent of money earmarked for specific goals such as retirement funds in a 401k or IRA. That means four in ten Americans (40%) do not have any emergency savings.

Among those who do have emergency funds, the average amount they have saved is $25,500. Only half (53%) say their savings would be enough to cover more than six months of expenses. 

In forthcoming data sets, the 2024 Planning & Progress Study will explore wide-ranging issues facing Americans spanning retirement income, emerging technology, professional help, generational planning and more. 

Younger Americans are More Optimistic than Older Americans About the Potential of AI to Help Manage Money, According to Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning & Progress Study

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to evolve and fuel debate about its transformative power on business and society, younger Americans are far more optimistic about the technology’s potential to help them reach their financial goals. More than half of Gen Z’ers (57%) and Millennials (55%) say they are excited about the impact AI and generative AI (GenAI) tools could have on their financial lives. Meanwhile, older Americans are more skeptical – only 38% of Gen X’ers and 23% of Boomers+ say they are excited. These are the latest findings from Northwestern Mutual’s 2024 Planning & Progress Study and the first-ever research findings on AI in the study’s history.

According to the survey results, 63% of Gen Z and 57% of Millennials say AI will “improve the customer experience in the financial sector, including with financial planning.” Conversely, less than half of Gen X (44%) and Boomers+ (32%) share this sentiment.

When asked to identify the potential benefit of AI Americans’ are most excited about when it comes to managing their money, “advanced data analysis” emerged as the top choice. Faster response times, increased efficiencies, improved customer service and greater opportunities for customization rounded out the remainder of the top five benefits.

“Younger generations are more willing to accept having their financial services partners leverage GenAI to manage their money,” said Christian Mitchell, executive vice president and chief customer officer at Northwestern Mutual. “However, even older generations say they are comfortable with their financial advisor leveraging the technology to ask even better questions and help them build wealth and financial security. The majority believe AI and GenAI can be a fantastic addition for a trusted advisor, helping financial professionals deliver even better results and experiences for their clients. The bottom line is this: artificial intelligence can help organizations find human capacity, not replace it.”

The future is human + digital

In a pure side-by-side comparison, the research shows that people trust humans (54%) far more than AI alone (15%) across most core elements of financial planning, from creating a retirement plan to asking a financial question to managing budgets. 

At the same time, the survey shows that people are largely comfortable with financial advisors and providers using AI tools for common tasks like fraud detection, answering service calls and joining meetings, and capturing notes, to more sophisticated tasks like predicting financial trends and modeling financial planning scenarios.

“It’s still very early in terms of how far the technology will go, but AI tools are going to allow for the mass automation of tasks, significantly reducing manual work and deeply improving efficiencies across not just financial services, but most industries,” said Mitchell. “By alleviating the most tedious and administrative aspects of our work, it will free up precious time to focus on building human connections and deliverables that provide the greatest value. So, it is people who sit at the heart of this digital transformation. The expertise and personalization that financial advisors provide can’t be replicated or replaced by AI, but it can be enhanced. That’s why we believe the future is human + digital.”

People aren’t ready to replace humans with AI yet… but signs of cautious trust are there.

The study also explored people’s comfort level with AI in a few areas outside of financial planning. While very few are ready to replace humans with AI right away, trust levels in the emerging technology were higher than one might expect. For example, 40% of Americans are either somewhat or very trusting of AI taking over for human umpires and referees in professional sports; 35% say the same about AI taking over for nurses when collecting information such as medical histories and current symptoms during doctor’s visits; a third (33%) say the same about AI taking over from artists to produce movies, books, music and paintings; and nearly a third (32%) say the same about AI taking over for educators to teach core curriculum classes.

In forthcoming data sets, the 2024 Northwestern Mutual Planning & Progress Study will explore wide-ranging issues facing Americans spanning retirement income, professional help, generational planning and more. 

Read the 2024 Planning & Progress Study – Artificial Intelligence (AI) & Money

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Cultural Issues and the 2024 Election

4. Gender, family, reproductive issues and the 2024 election

Table of contents.

• Voters’ views about race and society, the impact of the legacy of slavery
• Most voters, but not all, view the nation’s diversity as a strength
• How should the country handle undocumented immigrants currently in the U.S.?
• Attitudes toward hearing other languages in public places
• Biden and Trump supporters’ views about discussing America’s historical successes, failures
• How does the U.S. compare with other countries?
• Views of women’s progress
• How much of a priority should marriage and children be?
• Abortion, IVF access and birth control
• Views of gender identity
• Voters’ attitudes toward use of gender-neutral pronouns
• Societal impact of more social acceptance of lesbian, gay, bisexual people
• Religion and government policy
• How much influence should the Bible have on the nation’s laws, if any?
• Views on the federal government’s role in promoting Christian values
• Most voters say it is not necessary to believe in God to be moral
• Is the justice system too tough on criminals, or not tough enough?
• Policing and law enforcement
• How Trump, Biden supporters view gun rights and ownership
• Views on the increasing number of guns in the U.S.
• Acknowledgments
• The American Trends Panel survey methodology

Biden and Trump voters differ sharply over the state of women’s progress in the U.S., as well as over whether society should prioritize marriage and children.

Yet majorities of both candidates’ supporters say that the gains women have made in society have not come at the expense of men.

Nearly two years after the Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade decision that guaranteed a right to abortion, the issue continues to divide the two coalitions: Biden supporters overwhelmingly say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while a narrower majority of Trump backers say it should not.

But the two groups generally share the view that birth control and access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) should be widely available. Majorities of both Biden and Trump supporters view the broad availability of birth control as a good thing and say the same about access to IVF.

Supporters of Joe Biden and Donald Trump have mirror-image views on whether women face obstacles to getting ahead in society that men do not.

• About three-quarters of Biden supporters (73%) say there are still significant obstacles making it harder for women than men to get ahead. About a quarter (26%) say these obstacles are now largely gone.
• In contrast, seven-in-ten Trump supporters say the obstacles that once made it harder for women than men to get ahead are now largely gone. About three-in-ten (29%) say women still face significant obstacles.

There were also wide gaps in these opinions during the 2016 and 2020 presidential campaigns .

Differences between Biden and Trump voters are much more modest when it comes to views of whether women’s gains have come at the expense of men. Sizable majorities of both Biden (90%) and Trump supporters (74%) reject this idea.

Among both Biden supporters and Trump supporters, men are more likely than women to say the obstacles that once made it harder for women than men to get ahead are now largely gone.

Among Trump supporters, 83% of men say this, compared with 55% of women.

Almost four-in-ten men who back Biden (37%) say women’s obstacles to progress are now largely gone. Just 16% of women who back Biden say the same.

While most voters across age groups and genders say that gains women have made have not come at the expense of men, a third of men who support Trump do think women’s gains have cost men. This share increases to 40% among men under age 50 who support Trump. About 20% of women or fewer – regardless of age or which candidate they support – say that women’s gains come at the expense of men.

Roughly four-in-ten registered voters (39%) say society is better off if people make marriage and having children a priority, while a majority (59%) say society is just as well off if people have priorities other than family and children.

• Trump supporters (59%) are much more likely than Biden supporters (19%) to say that it is better if people prioritize marriage and children.

There are modest differences between men and women in whether focusing on marriage and children makes society better.

• About six-in-ten men who support Trump (63%) say this, compared with 54% of Trump-supporting women. There is a similar gender gap among Biden supporters (22% of men vs. 16% of women).

Black voters who support Biden (29%) are more likely than White (17%) and Hispanic (16%) Biden supporters to say an emphasis on marriage and family makes society better off. Two-in-ten Asian voters who back Biden say this.

Marriage and children

Three-quarters of registered voters say they are comfortable with women not taking their husbands’ last names when they get married. Just a quarter are uncomfortable with this.

However, Trump supporters (37%) are much more likely than Biden supporters (13%) to express discomfort with married women not taking their husbands’ last names.

And men who support Trump (44%) are more likely than women who support him (29%) to say they are uncomfortable with the practice of women not taking their husbands’ last names.

Related: About 8 in 10 women in opposite-sex marriages say they took their husband’s last name

The nation’s fertility rate, which has been declining for years, is now at its lowest point in more than a century, according to a recent study by the Centers for Disease Control. About four-in-ten voters (43%) say it is neither good nor bad for society that people are having fewer children; 35% view this trend negatively, while 22% say it is good for society.

Biden supporters have mixed views of the fact that people are having fewer children. Half say this is neither good nor bad, 27% view this as good for society, and 23% say it is bad.

Trump supporters – especially men who back Trump – view this trend more negatively.

• Nearly half of Trump supporters (47%), including a 56% majority of men who support Trump, say it is bad for society that people are having fewer children. Roughly four-in-ten women who support Trump (37%) see this trend as a bad thing.

Abortion deeply divides supporters of Biden and Trump. About nine-in-ten Biden supporters (88%) say abortion should be legal in most (46%) or all (42%) cases. Just 11% of Biden supporters say abortion should be illegal in all or most cases.

Conversely, about six-in-ten Trump supporters (61%) say abortion should be illegal in all (11%) or most (50%) cases. A significant minority of Trump supporters say abortion should be legal in most or all cases (38%).

Related: Broad Public Support for Legal Abortion Persists 2 Years After Dobbs

Age, gender differences among Trump supporters – but not Biden supporters – on abortion

About half of Trump supporters ages 18 to 34 (51%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, a substantially higher share than among older Trump supporters (35% of those 35 and older).

Among Biden supporters, nearly nine-in-ten across all age groups say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.

Both women and men who back Trump are more likely to say abortion should be illegal than to say it should be legal. However, more women who support Trump (41%) say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, compared with 34% of men who support Trump.

There is no difference in these views between women and men who support Biden.

By contrast, 73% of all voters – including majorities of Biden (83%) and Trump supporters (64%) – say access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) is a good thing.

Related: Americans overwhelmingly say access to IVF is a good thing

Voters overwhelmingly express positive views of birth control, condoms and other forms of contraception being widely available in the United States. Nearly eight-in-ten (79%) say this is very or somewhat good for society, 13% view it as neither good nor bad, and 7% say it is bad.

• 93% of Biden supporters and 66% of Trump supporters say it’s good for society that birth control is widely available.
• Men who support Trump (61%) are less likely than women who back the former president (73%) to say that birth control being widely available is good for society. There is no meaningful gender gap on this question among Biden supporters.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Criminal Justice
• Discrimination & Prejudice
• Donald Trump
• Election 2024
• Gender Equality & Discrimination
• Gender Identity
• Immigration & Language Adoption
• LGBTQ Attitudes & Experiences
• Marriage & Divorce
• Partisanship & Issues
• Political Issues
• Racial Bias & Discrimination
• Religion & Government
• Religion & Politics
• Unauthorized Immigration

More than half of Americans are following election news closely, and many are already worn out

Americans have mixed views about how the news media cover biden’s, trump’s ages, an early look at black voters’ views on biden, trump and election 2024, voters’ views of trump and biden differ sharply by religion, in tight presidential race, voters are broadly critical of both biden and trump, most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

The state of AI in 2023: Generative AI’s breakout year

You have reached a page with older survey data. please see our 2024 survey results here ..

The latest annual McKinsey Global Survey  on the current state of AI confirms the explosive growth of generative AI (gen AI) tools . Less than a year after many of these tools debuted, one-third of our survey respondents say their organizations are using gen AI regularly in at least one business function. Amid recent advances, AI has risen from a topic relegated to tech employees to a focus of company leaders: nearly one-quarter of surveyed C-suite executives say they are personally using gen AI tools for work, and more than one-quarter of respondents from companies using AI say gen AI is already on their boards’ agendas. What’s more, 40 percent of respondents say their organizations will increase their investment in AI overall because of advances in gen AI. The findings show that these are still early days for managing gen AI–related risks, with less than half of respondents saying their organizations are mitigating even the risk they consider most relevant: inaccuracy.

The organizations that have already embedded AI capabilities have been the first to explore gen AI’s potential, and those seeing the most value from more traditional AI capabilities—a group we call AI high performers—are already outpacing others in their adoption of gen AI tools. 1 We define AI high performers as organizations that, according to respondents, attribute at least 20 percent of their EBIT to AI adoption.

The expected business disruption from gen AI is significant, and respondents predict meaningful changes to their workforces. They anticipate workforce cuts in certain areas and large reskilling efforts to address shifting talent needs. Yet while the use of gen AI might spur the adoption of other AI tools, we see few meaningful increases in organizations’ adoption of these technologies. The percent of organizations adopting any AI tools has held steady since 2022, and adoption remains concentrated within a small number of business functions.

Table of Contents

• It’s early days still, but use of gen AI is already widespread
• Leading companies are already ahead with gen AI
• AI-related talent needs shift, and AI’s workforce effects are expected to be substantial
• With all eyes on gen AI, AI adoption and impact remain steady

About the research

1. it’s early days still, but use of gen ai is already widespread.

The findings from the survey—which was in the field in mid-April 2023—show that, despite gen AI’s nascent public availability, experimentation with the tools  is already relatively common, and respondents expect the new capabilities to transform their industries. Gen AI has captured interest across the business population: individuals across regions, industries, and seniority levels are using gen AI for work and outside of work. Seventy-nine percent of all respondents say they’ve had at least some exposure to gen AI, either for work or outside of work, and 22 percent say they are regularly using it in their own work. While reported use is quite similar across seniority levels, it is highest among respondents working in the technology sector and those in North America.

Organizations, too, are now commonly using gen AI. One-third of all respondents say their organizations are already regularly using generative AI in at least one function—meaning that 60 percent of organizations with reported AI adoption are using gen AI. What’s more, 40 percent of those reporting AI adoption at their organizations say their companies expect to invest more in AI overall thanks to generative AI, and 28 percent say generative AI use is already on their board’s agenda. The most commonly reported business functions using these newer tools are the same as those in which AI use is most common overall: marketing and sales, product and service development, and service operations, such as customer care and back-office support. This suggests that organizations are pursuing these new tools where the most value is. In our previous research , these three areas, along with software engineering, showed the potential to deliver about 75 percent of the total annual value from generative AI use cases.

In these early days, expectations for gen AI’s impact are high : three-quarters of all respondents expect gen AI to cause significant or disruptive change in the nature of their industry’s competition in the next three years. Survey respondents working in the technology and financial-services industries are the most likely to expect disruptive change from gen AI. Our previous research shows  that, while all industries are indeed likely to see some degree of disruption, the level of impact is likely to vary. 2 “ The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier ,” McKinsey, June 14, 2023. Industries relying most heavily on knowledge work are likely to see more disruption—and potentially reap more value. While our estimates suggest that tech companies, unsurprisingly, are poised to see the highest impact from gen AI—adding value equivalent to as much as 9 percent of global industry revenue—knowledge-based industries such as banking (up to 5 percent), pharmaceuticals and medical products (also up to 5 percent), and education (up to 4 percent) could experience significant effects as well. By contrast, manufacturing-based industries, such as aerospace, automotives, and advanced electronics, could experience less disruptive effects. This stands in contrast to the impact of previous technology waves that affected manufacturing the most and is due to gen AI’s strengths in language-based activities, as opposed to those requiring physical labor.

Responses show many organizations not yet addressing potential risks from gen AI

According to the survey, few companies seem fully prepared for the widespread use of gen AI—or the business risks these tools may bring. Just 21 percent of respondents reporting AI adoption say their organizations have established policies governing employees’ use of gen AI technologies in their work. And when we asked specifically about the risks of adopting gen AI, few respondents say their companies are mitigating the most commonly cited risk with gen AI: inaccuracy. Respondents cite inaccuracy more frequently than both cybersecurity and regulatory compliance, which were the most common risks from AI overall in previous surveys. Just 32 percent say they’re mitigating inaccuracy, a smaller percentage than the 38 percent who say they mitigate cybersecurity risks. Interestingly, this figure is significantly lower than the percentage of respondents who reported mitigating AI-related cybersecurity last year (51 percent). Overall, much as we’ve seen in previous years, most respondents say their organizations are not addressing AI-related risks.

2. Leading companies are already ahead with gen AI

The survey results show that AI high performers—that is, organizations where respondents say at least 20 percent of EBIT in 2022 was attributable to AI use—are going all in on artificial intelligence, both with gen AI and more traditional AI capabilities. These organizations that achieve significant value from AI are already using gen AI in more business functions than other organizations do, especially in product and service development and risk and supply chain management. When looking at all AI capabilities—including more traditional machine learning capabilities, robotic process automation, and chatbots—AI high performers also are much more likely than others to use AI in product and service development, for uses such as product-development-cycle optimization, adding new features to existing products, and creating new AI-based products. These organizations also are using AI more often than other organizations in risk modeling and for uses within HR such as performance management and organization design and workforce deployment optimization.

AI high performers are much more likely than others to use AI in product and service development.

Another difference from their peers: high performers’ gen AI efforts are less oriented toward cost reduction, which is a top priority at other organizations. Respondents from AI high performers are twice as likely as others to say their organizations’ top objective for gen AI is to create entirely new businesses or sources of revenue—and they’re most likely to cite the increase in the value of existing offerings through new AI-based features.

As we’ve seen in previous years , these high-performing organizations invest much more than others in AI: respondents from AI high performers are more than five times more likely than others to say they spend more than 20 percent of their digital budgets on AI. They also use AI capabilities more broadly throughout the organization. Respondents from high performers are much more likely than others to say that their organizations have adopted AI in four or more business functions and that they have embedded a higher number of AI capabilities. For example, respondents from high performers more often report embedding knowledge graphs in at least one product or business function process, in addition to gen AI and related natural-language capabilities.

While AI high performers are not immune to the challenges of capturing value from AI, the results suggest that the difficulties they face reflect their relative AI maturity, while others struggle with the more foundational, strategic elements of AI adoption. Respondents at AI high performers most often point to models and tools, such as monitoring model performance in production and retraining models as needed over time, as their top challenge. By comparison, other respondents cite strategy issues, such as setting a clearly defined AI vision that is linked with business value or finding sufficient resources.

The findings offer further evidence that even high performers haven’t mastered best practices regarding AI adoption, such as machine-learning-operations (MLOps) approaches, though they are much more likely than others to do so. For example, just 35 percent of respondents at AI high performers report that where possible, their organizations assemble existing components, rather than reinvent them, but that’s a much larger share than the 19 percent of respondents from other organizations who report that practice.

Many specialized MLOps technologies and practices  may be needed to adopt some of the more transformative uses cases that gen AI applications can deliver—and do so as safely as possible. Live-model operations is one such area, where monitoring systems and setting up instant alerts to enable rapid issue resolution can keep gen AI systems in check. High performers stand out in this respect but have room to grow: one-quarter of respondents from these organizations say their entire system is monitored and equipped with instant alerts, compared with just 12 percent of other respondents.

3. AI-related talent needs shift, and AI’s workforce effects are expected to be substantial

Our latest survey results show changes in the roles that organizations are filling to support their AI ambitions. In the past year, organizations using AI most often hired data engineers, machine learning engineers, and Al data scientists—all roles that respondents commonly reported hiring in the previous survey. But a much smaller share of respondents report hiring AI-related-software engineers—the most-hired role last year—than in the previous survey (28 percent in the latest survey, down from 39 percent). Roles in prompt engineering have recently emerged, as the need for that skill set rises alongside gen AI adoption, with 7 percent of respondents whose organizations have adopted AI reporting those hires in the past year.

The findings suggest that hiring for AI-related roles remains a challenge but has become somewhat easier over the past year, which could reflect the spate of layoffs at technology companies from late 2022 through the first half of 2023. Smaller shares of respondents than in the previous survey report difficulty hiring for roles such as AI data scientists, data engineers, and data-visualization specialists, though responses suggest that hiring machine learning engineers and AI product owners remains as much of a challenge as in the previous year.

Looking ahead to the next three years, respondents predict that the adoption of AI will reshape many roles in the workforce. Generally, they expect more employees to be reskilled than to be separated. Nearly four in ten respondents reporting AI adoption expect more than 20 percent of their companies’ workforces will be reskilled, whereas 8 percent of respondents say the size of their workforces will decrease by more than 20 percent.

Looking specifically at gen AI’s predicted impact, service operations is the only function in which most respondents expect to see a decrease in workforce size at their organizations. This finding generally aligns with what our recent research  suggests: while the emergence of gen AI increased our estimate of the percentage of worker activities that could be automated (60 to 70 percent, up from 50 percent), this doesn’t necessarily translate into the automation of an entire role.

AI high performers are expected to conduct much higher levels of reskilling than other companies are. Respondents at these organizations are over three times more likely than others to say their organizations will reskill more than 30 percent of their workforces over the next three years as a result of AI adoption.

4. With all eyes on gen AI, AI adoption and impact remain steady

While the use of gen AI tools is spreading rapidly, the survey data doesn’t show that these newer tools are propelling organizations’ overall AI adoption. The share of organizations that have adopted AI overall remains steady, at least for the moment, with 55 percent of respondents reporting that their organizations have adopted AI. Less than a third of respondents continue to say that their organizations have adopted AI in more than one business function, suggesting that AI use remains limited in scope. Product and service development and service operations continue to be the two business functions in which respondents most often report AI adoption, as was true in the previous four surveys. And overall, just 23 percent of respondents say at least 5 percent of their organizations’ EBIT last year was attributable to their use of AI—essentially flat with the previous survey—suggesting there is much more room to capture value.

Organizations continue to see returns in the business areas in which they are using AI, and they plan to increase investment in the years ahead. We see a majority of respondents reporting AI-related revenue increases within each business function using AI. And looking ahead, more than two-thirds expect their organizations to increase their AI investment over the next three years.

The online survey was in the field April 11 to 21, 2023, and garnered responses from 1,684 participants representing the full range of regions, industries, company sizes, functional specialties, and tenures. Of those respondents, 913 said their organizations had adopted AI in at least one function and were asked questions about their organizations’ AI use. To adjust for differences in response rates, the data are weighted by the contribution of each respondent’s nation to global GDP.

The survey content and analysis were developed by Michael Chui , a partner at the McKinsey Global Institute and a partner in McKinsey’s Bay Area office, where Lareina Yee is a senior partner; Bryce Hall , an associate partner in the Washington, DC, office; and senior partners Alex Singla and Alexander Sukharevsky , global leaders of QuantumBlack, AI by McKinsey, based in the Chicago and London offices, respectively.

They wish to thank Shivani Gupta, Abhisek Jena, Begum Ortaoglu, Barr Seitz, and Li Zhang for their contributions to this work.

This article was edited by Heather Hanselman, an editor in the Atlanta office.

Explore a career with us

Related articles.

The economic potential of generative AI: The next productivity frontier

What is generative AI?

Exploring opportunities in the generative AI value chain