academics

Exam Rules and Regulations

Please consult the Student Handbook for the information on En Route M.A., Advancement to Doctoral Candidacy, Dissertation Proposal, Dissertation Committee, and the Third Examination (Oral Defense)

---

First Examination

Students write a Qualifying Paper in one of the core areas (i.e., Syntax, Semantics, or Phonology), under the supervision of a faculty member (supervisor). The content of the Qualifying Paper must be the student’s original research. The Qualifying Paper is evaluated by a standing committee of three faculty members and the Qualifying Paper supervisor. The standing committee will rotate on a semester-by-semester basis. The committee will decide whether the Qualifying Paper constitutes a Pass or Fail of the First Exam. In the case of a Fail, the student will be allowed to re-take the First Exam once, within 1 year of having taken the exam for the first time. Students will not be allowed to register for the 46th credit unless s/he has passed the First Exam. For the re-take, the student may choose a new supervisor, and/or a new topic or core area.

Guidelines:

General description:
The First Exam consists of a Qualifying Paper (QP1) in one of the core areas, i.e., syntax, semantics or phonology. The QP1 must be written under the supervision of one member of the faculty, selected by the student and approved by the Executive Officer (EO). It will be evaluated by a standing committee appointed by the EO. The faculty supervisor will be part of the evaluation committee (see below).

Content and Form of the QP1:
The QP1 should make an original contribution, commensurate with 30 to 45 credits of study, on a topic within Linguistics, broadly construed. The QP1 should demonstrate that the candidate controls the literature in a core area relevant to that topic. The QP1 may include application of these areas in a specific domain, such as language acquisition or processing. The QP1 must reveal substantial understanding of the core area selected and of particular issues arising from the application of that core area to the domain in question. A QP1 should be written with a linguistically informed, but not necessarily linguistically specialized, audience in mind. A QP1 will typically be from 25 to 50 double-spaced pages in length (not including the bibliography or appendices). The faculty supervisor may consult with the standing committee about the content and form of the QP1.

Procedures and Evaluation of the QP1:
When ready, but typically within a year or so of the planned submission, the student will submit a brief description of the topic (100 words or less) to the QP1 Evaluation Committee along with an indication of the core area. The Committee will offer advice or request clarification if it is not clear that the chosen topic is able to fulfill the content requirements (above). QP1s will be evaluated twice a year. Submission dates are approximately November 15th and March 31st of every year.

Standing Committee:
Every academic year, the EO will appoint three members of the faculty to serve as the standing committee evaluating all First Exams submitted in that year. In addition, for any given student, the faculty supervisor will also be part of the evaluation committee. This means that the QP1 may in some cases be evaluated by four faculty members, namely in the case where the faculty supervisor is not already a member of the standing committee appointed for that academic year.

Pass/Fail Guidelines:
The QP1 Evaluation Committee will typically meet twice a year, each time within two weeks of the submission deadline. Every member of the evaluation committee, including the faculty supervisor, will have a vote to pass or fail the QP1. In case of a Fail, the student will be allowed to resubmit the QP1 once, within one year of having submitted the QP1 for the first time. The student may choose a new faculty supervisor and/or a new topic or core area for the resubmission. In the case of a disagreement and in particular, of an equal two-way split between Pass and Fail, it will be the supervisor’s responsibility to encourage further discussion amongst the evaluators so as to resolve the disagreement. Failing a resolution, the matter will be referred to the Executive Officer.

If a student does not submit a final QP1 at the agreed-upon deadline, it is considered a fail.

QP1 workshop:
Students preparing to submit their QP1 must enroll in a Qualifying Paper Workshop prior to writing their QP1. The Qualifying Paper Workshop will be offered regularly by faculty members, on a rotating basis. The purpose of the Qualifying Paper Workshop will be to enhance students’ paper writing and argumentation skills; for the content of the QP1, students will consult with their faculty supervisor and other faculty members specializing in the topic chosen. The Qualifying Paper Workshop will be offered every year as a regular 3-credit course.

Time limits:
Students must write a passing QP1 before registering for the 46th credit. Students will be advised to start the writing process around the time they have 30 credits (approximately 10 courses). Full-time students would therefore take a Qualifying Paper workshop during their second year and begin writing their QP1 by the end of their second year.

Second Examination

Students write a Qualifying Paper in a core or non-core area on a topic not overlapping that of the First Exam.  As in the case of the First Exam, the content of the Qualifying Paper must be the student’s original research.  As part of the exam, the student must orally present and defend the Qualifying Paper. The Qualifying Paper is evaluated by three faculty members. The committee will decide whether the Qualifying Paper constitutes a Pass or Fail of the Second Exam. In the case of a Fail, the student will be allowed to re-take the Second Exam once, within one year of having taken the exam for the first time.  For the re-take, the student may ask the Executive Officer to form a new committee and/or choose a new area or topic.  Students must successfully complete the Second Exam by no later than the end of their fifth year (tenth semester) to remain in the program.
Formal Proposal Defense:

1. The literature/bibliography review which has been part of the formal requirement of the Second Exam will now be part of the proposal defense.
2. The proposal defense must take place within one semester after passing the Second Exam

Guidelines:

General description:
The second exam consists of a Qualifying Paper (QP2) in a core or non-core area on a topic different from that of the student’s first QP. Like the First QP, the Second QP must consist of the student’s original research. The 2nd QP is written under the direction of an Advisory Committee consisting of three members of the faculty selected by the student and approved by the EO. One member of the Advisory Committee, selected by the student, will function as the Chair of the Committee.

Defense of the Second Exam:
Students will set a date for the presentation and defense of the Second Exam. A non-specialist faculty who is not part of the Advisory Committee and chosen by the Committee and the student, will be invited to attend the presentation. The Second QP will include an abstract which will be made available to the non-specialist faculty member prior to the presentation, so as to familiarize him/her with the topic. The non-specialist faculty member will, however, not read the QP itself before the presentation. The purpose of the inclusion of a non-specialist in the presentation part of the Second Exam is to give students the opportunity to defend original research to a wider audience, in preparation for eventualities such as job talks.

Evaluation of the Second Exam:
The Advisory Committee will decide whether the Second QP constitutes a Pass or a Fail of the Second Exam. The non-specialist faculty member will participate in the question and discussion period during the presentation of the Second QP and will also participate in the discussion period evaluating the QP after the presentation. However, the non-specialist faculty member will not have a vote. The non-specialist faculty will be chosen by the student and the Advisory Committee.

Pass/Fail Guidelines:
Every member of the Advisory Committee will have a vote to pass or fail the 2nd QP. In case of a Fail, the student will be allowed to resubmit the Second QP once, within one year of having submitted the Second QP for the first time. The student may form a new Advisory Committee or choose a new topic for the resubmission.

Time limits:
Students must take the Second Exam by no later than the end of their tenth semester.