Selection Criteria

 

MASTER’S DEGREE

Information about the selection process

The Admissions Committee will evaluate the applicant’s curriculum vitae, along with the written exam and composition. During the selection process, an interview will be scheduled to verify the most adequate research line for each candidate. Applicants are required to participate in all stages of the process and for eligibility cannot obtain grade zero in any of the items assessed.

The curriculum vitae will be evaluated according to the criteria described in table 1.

Table 1: items evaluated in the curriculum vitae

 

Analyzed aspect Criteria Score
Course completion time (maximum of 04 points) x semesters of x semesters
(x+1) semesters of x semesters
(x+2) semesters of x semesters
(x+3) semesters of x semesters
(x+4) semesters of x semesters

4
3
2
1
0

 
Undergraduate research project and internship (maximum of 04 points) Research Project (minimum
of 06 months)
Internship (minimum of 06 months)

 

1


1
 

 
Presentation of project in congresses;Published scientific article (maximum of 02 points) 01 point per work presented, when the candidates is the first author

01 point per published paper, if the candidate is one of the authors

1
 

 

1

 

* x corresponds to the ideal number of semesters for completing the undergraduate course.

The curriculum with the greatest score will be graded 10 and serve as base to assess all other curriculums among the candidates (Max Sum). Thus, grades will be obtained through the formula:

CV grade = (CVc Sum * 10) / (Max Sum)

 “CVc Sum” is the sum of each candidate’s points and “Max Sum” the greatest value among “CVc Sum”.

The written exam will take place in the first day of exams and the composition on the second. If possible, interviews will take place starting on the third day. The applicant will indicate in the registration form the place of preference for the written exam to be taken. In this exam, the candidate must answer 5 of the 6 Physics and Calculus questions provided, which will cover:

  •      Differential and integral calculus;
  •      Linear algebra, vectors and geometry;
  •      Basic thermodynamics and mechanics.

The composition will have the theme defined by the Admissions Committee on the date of the exam, and the candidate will be given one hour to develop the text.


PREVIOUS EXAMS

(2005) (2006) (2007) (2008) (2009) (2010) (2011) (2012) (2013) (2014) (2015) (2016)


Applicants with grade equal to or greater than 5 may be accepted in the program, subjected to supervisor availability. The rank obtained during the selection process will later be used as a criterion for scholarship concession.

If the applicant is unable to be in São Paulo during the exams week, the interview may occur through videoconference (Messenger, Skype or similar). Both the composition and written test may be taken in one of the accredited institutions selected by the applicant. A professor of the chosen institution will be contacted to administer the exams.

Research lines

1.     Studies and applications in weather and climate

2.     Physics of atmospheric processes and applications

3.     Hydrometeorology

4.     Atmosphere - Biosphere – Ocean interaction

5.     Micrometeorology

6.     Atmospheric Pollution

 

Accredited institutions for taking exams

  • Universidade Federal de Pelotas - Pelotas/R
  • Universidade Federal de Santa Maria - Santa Maria/RS
  • Universidade Tecnológica Federal do Paraná – Campus Londrina – Londrina/PR
  • Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro - Rio de Janeiro/RJ
  • Universidade Federal de Alagoas - Maceió/AL
  • Universidade Federal de Campina Grande - Campina Grande/PB
  • Universidade Federal do Pará - Belém/PA
  • Serviço Nacional de Meteorologia e Hidrologia – SENAMHI – Lima – Peru  
  • Universidade de Valparaiso – Valparaíso – Chile
  • Universidade de São Paulo - São Paulo/SP


Recommended bibliography


PHD WITH DIRECT ENTRY

The selection process for PhD with direct entry occurs twice a year, on the same dates of the master’s selection process, as in the calendar published in program’s webpage and in Diário Oficial do Estado de São Paulo.

The admissions exam is divided in two stages:

  • The first stage is eliminatory, composed of an evaluation of each candidate’s curriculum vitae, composition and written test. The covered content, weights of each test, exam duration and items evaluated in the curriculum vitae will be disclosed in the call for applications at the program’s webpage and in Diário Oficial do Estado de São Paulo.
  • On the second stage applicant’s projects are presented to a committee constituted of two members chosen by the CCP, with a maximum duration of 30 minutes. Assessment of research projects will proceed according to items enclosed in the Evaluation Form available at the program’s webpage.

Candidates who obtain grades equal to or higher than five in the first and seven in the second stage will be approved.


PHD


Applicants for the PhD course will be evaluated by the written and oral presentations of the research project.

The research project and documentation will be analyzed by an evaluation committee composed of two members chosen by the Meteorology Graduate Program Coordinating Commission. Additionally, the candidate will give a brief presentation about the project to the appointed committee to clarify eventual doubts.

The CCP evaluates the result of the assessment made by the evaluation committee and forwards the candidate’s result of acceptance or refusal to the Graduate Studies Committee.

The committee will attribute grades to the following items assessed:

About the project

1.     Project’s contribution to scientific knowledge

2.     Definition of objectives

3.     Adequacy of the proposed methodology

4.     Adequacy of the proposed equipment

5.     Adequacy of the proposed schedule

About the candidate

6.     Academic records

7.     Candidate’s knowledge on the subject

8.     Capacity to defend ideas

9.     Clarity and concision in writing

10.  Curriculum vitae


Each topic is worth a minimum of 0.25 points and a maximum of 1 point, divided in four classes of score Results are reported on a 4-band scale: unsatisfactory (0.25 points), average (0.5 points), good (0.75 points) and excellent (1.0 point).

A candidate is approved if the average score between assessments given by both examiners is 7 (seven) or above.