Comprehensive examination

Please note that the comprehensive examination is a closed (hence not public) defence and is intended to be an evaluation of the student’s knowledge and not a ceremonial rite of passage. Students must successfully pass their comprehensive exam before proceeding to their thesis proposal defense. The comprehensive exam was reformed in April 2024 and doctoral students from the September 2023 and incoming September 2024 cohorts are eligible to complete this program requirement under the previous version, which is available by request via email to [email protected].

Components with Deadlines

There are four components to the comprehensive exam: a reading list, examination questions, two written papers, and an oral examination.

Summary of Deadlines

• Reading List: 31 March or next business day (year 1 / session 2).
• Exam Questions: To be submitted by the student with supervisor and committee approval by 30 September or next business day (year 2 / session 1).
• Exams - first attempt: 
  • Exam 1: to be written by the student within three weeks beginning the third Monday of October (year 2 / session 1)
  • Exam 2: to be written by the student within three weeks beginning the second Monday of November (year 2 / session 1)
  • Results: to be communicated by the supervisor and committee to the student by Friday of the second week of January (year 2 / session 2)
• Oral Examination - first attempt: 
  • Registration: third week of January (year 2 / session 2)
  • Oral examination: end of the first week of February
    (year 2 / session 2)

• Exams - second attempt: 

  *only if first attempt is unsuccessful

  • Exam 1: to be written by the student within three weeks beginning the last Monday of January (year 2 / session 2)
  • Exam 2: to be written by the student within three weeks beginning the third Monday of February (year 2 / session 2)
  • Results: to be communicated by the supervisor and committee to the student by Friday of the first week of April (year 2 / session 2)

• Oral Examination - second attempt: 

  *only if first attempt is unsuccessful 

  • Registration: second week of April (year 2 / session 2)
  • Oral examination: before the final working day of April (year 2 / session 2)

Description

Each doctoral student must produce a personalized reading list comprised of significant books, journal articles, and book chapters drawn from criminology, as well as the social sciences and humanities. It is recommended that the list should be balanced between the seminal works in their research area (approximately 33%), as well as a selection of broader theoretical (approximately 33%) and epistemological (approximately 33%) readings. It is also recommended that the total page count for the readings on the list be between 6,000 and 10,000 pages. It is the responsibility of the supervisor and the other supervisory committee members to identify any weakness in the student’s background and ensure these are addressed through the personalized reading list.

Deadline

The personalized reading list must be created and accepted by the student’s supervisor and doctoral committee. It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that the reading list, accompanied by the Registration of Personalized Reading List (PDF, 211 KB) form is signed by all members of the committee, and is deposited in their file by March 31 (or the next business day should this date fall on a weekend) of their second semester in year one of studies.

Description

Having read the  works from their approved reading lists, the student will formulate and submit two lists each comprised of two potential examination questions (the first of which will be broad in scope and the second of which will be narrow in scope) that must be approved by their supervisor and doctoral committee (i.e. the student will need to revise the questions until they are deemed acceptable by the supervisor and committee).

The potential examination questions must illustrate that the student has engaged in a fulsome, critical, and analytical way with the literature. The questions should speak to some  problem/puzzle in the literature emerging from the readings, one that the student formulates through their engagement with the literature. One set of questions will address a general puzzle/problem/issue that emerges from the student’s engagement with the scholarship on their reading list while the second set will address a specific puzzle/problem/issue that emerges from the student’s engagement with the scholarship on their reading list.  These questions will allow the student to locate themselves with respect to the theoretical, epistemological, and substantive themes, ideas, issues, gaps and so forth emerging from the literature, and as explored within the discipline of criminology, as well as the social sciences and humanities, generally and their research area specifically. The questions will also encourage the student to move beyond descriptive reading and writing toward higher order thinking, synthesis and analysis.
 
Following approval of the potential examination questions, one question will be selected by the student’s supervisor and doctoral committee from the first list for the first comprehensive exam paper and another from the second list for the second comprehensive exam paper to be written.

Deadline

The approved questions will be recorded on the potential examination questions form (PDF), which, as also noted above, must be approved by the student’s supervisor and doctoral committee. This document must be submitted by September 30 (or the next business day should this date fall on a weekend) of the student’s second year of study.

The supervisor and doctoral committee will then select and assign the examination question for the first paper no later than noon on the third Monday of October of the student’s second year of study. They will then assign the examination question for the second paper no later than noon on the second Monday of November of the student’s second year of study.

Description and Deadlines

Once the first examination question has been assigned to the student no later than noon on the third Monday of October of the student’s second year of study, the student will complete their first comprehensive examination paper (approximately 25-30 double-spaces pages plus references and footnotes) within three weeks. After completing their first comprehensive exam paper, the second examination question will be assigned to the student no later than noon on the second Monday of November of the student’s second year of study. From there, the student will complete their second comprehensive examination paper (approximately 25-30 double-spaces pages plus references and footnotes) within three weeks.

Evaluation of the Papers

Papers should display active engagement with and depth of understanding of the scholarship examined. Papers should be structured as a conceptual, theoretical and epistemological essay with a position/argument/thesis, be logical in their organisation, and be primarily analytical and not descriptive. In other words, the student is not preparing a report or a literature review. Rather, the student is preparing two essays that demonstrate that they can formulate and defend an argument with respect to the question they are answering. The argument/position will be well supported. They are not merely offering an answer, but are displaying their comprehension of the material (i.e. key concepts, theories and epistemologies within the literatures examined) through formulating a position and crafting an explanation that enables them to respond to the question posed. In this way they are working toward a deeper understanding of the scholarship. The committee and supervisor must be satisfied with the depth and scope of the student’s response, including the organisation of the paper, grammar, and the analysis presented. Papers will be graded individually on a satisfactory/unsatisfactory basis. Two of three committee members must agree that each paper is satisfactory for the student to satisfy the requirements for the comprehensive examination. The student will be informed no later than the Friday of the second week of January of the following term whether they passed or failed their two comprehensive examination papers.

Extensions and Second Attempts

In cases where one or both comprehensive examination papers are deemed to be unsatisfactory during the first attempt, the student will be considered to have failed the exam. In cases where one paper is deemed to be unsatisfactory during the first attempt, the student will have one additional opportunity to write and pass their paper using the same question or having their supervisor and committee select a new question assigned no later than the last Monday of January. From there, the student will complete the comprehensive examination paper (approximately 25-30 double-spaces pages plus references and footnotes) within three weeks.

In cases where a second paper was also deemed to be unsatisfactory during the first attempt, the student will have one additional opportunity to write and pass their paper using the same question or having their supervisor and committee select a new question assigned no later than the third Monday of February. From there, the student will complete the comprehensive examination paper (approximately 25-30 double-spaces pages plus references and footnotes) within three weeks.

Should the student fail on their second attempt, they will be withdrawn from the program, as per the University’s Academic Regulation, 11-5.2 (Unsatisfactory Progress and Withdrawal).

Students can request a deferral for their comprehensive exam papers if they are unable to meet the deadlines for reasons beyond their control. Deferral requests must be submitted to the PhD Program Supervisor and include proper documentation (such as a medical certificate in the case of an illness) and a letter of support/justification for the deferral from the student’s supervisor. Please consult Academic Regulation 11-5.3 (Deferred Evaluation) for further details.

Description

Students must orally defend their two comprehensive papers before a jury comprised of their doctoral supervisor(s) and two committee members.

Evaluation of Oral Exam

Students are expected to be able to meet the same criteria as the two written papers when defending them.

Deadline

The first attempt of the oral comprehensive defence can only occur during the first week in February of the student’s 5th semester if they receive a passing grade on both written papers. Students who fail one or both of their comprehensive exam papers or the oral comprehensive defence the first time are entitled to one additional opportunity to write and submit the failed paper(s). The second attempt of the oral comprehensive defence must do so before the final day (as per the academic calendar) of their 5th semester of studies.

Registration for the defence

Following the thesis committee’s acceptance of the two papers, the upcoming comprehensive exam must be registered the following week. The first defence must take place no later than the first week of February of the second academic year of registration (5th semester). It is the supervisor’s responsibility to submit the Registration for Comprehensive Exam (PDF, 253 KB) form (indicating the date and location of the defence, naming the members of the committee and identifying the defence chair) to the Secretariat. The chair must be a professor in the Department who is also a member of the School of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies.

1. At the beginning of the defence the student will be asked to leave the room. During their absence the chair will confirm that the jury is satisfied that the two papers are accepted for defence, review the rules of the process and ascertain the order of examiners. It is suggested (but not mandatory) that the order of questioning be as follows: questioning will commence with a member of the committee, followed by the second committee member and then the supervisor.
2. The exam will be held in the language in which the student is registered unless the student requests otherwise. Unless previously agreed, all questions or comments are to be posed in the language in which the student is registered.
3. There are at least two rounds of formal questioning (approximately 2-3 questions per round). The first round will focus on questions regarding the first paper and the second round will focus on the second paper. There may also be a third, more informal round of questioning or discussion if any of the jury members so desire.
4. During the first two (formal) rounds of questioning it is expected that all jury members respect that this is an examination and refrain from intervening during another examiner’s questioning of the student.
5. Students are not permitted to bring any written notes or documents whatsoever into the examination room; however, they are permitted to bring copies of their comprehensive papers, blank paper and writing instruments.
6. At the end of the defence the student will be asked to leave the room and the chair will provide the evaluation forms to the jury members. In order for the student to pass the oral comprehensive examination, each member of the jury must give a pass mark (P). Each member must also provide a brief written report on the performance of the student highlighting strengths and weaknesses (also to be provided to the student). The transcript must indicate whether the exam was a success (P) or a failure (F).
7. In case of failure students may repeat the examination once. The repetition must take place before the final day (as per the academic calendar) of student’s 5th semester in the program. Students who also fail their second oral examination will be withdrawn from the program.
8. Students may appeal the results of the exam, as they may any other exam at the graduate level. The procedure for the appeal is described in the rules of the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies.

The Chair is expected to:

• Retrieve the required documents from the Secretariat;
• Remind the jury that this is an examination and that jury members are to refrain from intervening in the process;
• Establish the order of questioning, facilitate the process and ensure that, during the first two rounds of questioning, jury members do not intervene during another examiner’s questioning;
• Take notes of key issues raised in the process;
• At the end of the defence request that the student leave for the evaluation process and supervise the evaluation;
• Advise the student if they have, or have not, been successful;
• Following the defense, submit the completed documentation to the Secretariat.

* Please note that completion of the two papers is a prerequisite for sitting the oral examination and should not be the sole basis of the jury’s evaluation.

The oral exam provides an opportunity to evaluate the level of the candidate’s knowledge regarding:

• Theoretical, epistemological, and substantive themes, ideas, gaps and so forth emerging from literature and research in their area of specialization; and
• Broad debates in the discipline of criminology, as well as the social sciences and humanities generally and their research area specifically.

The jury will consider whether the student demonstrates:

• Capacity to substantiate arguments with respect to the questions they are answering;
• Ability to display their comprehension the material through formulating and defending a position;
• Ability to demonstrate a deep understanding of the scholarship mobilized.