Internal policy

Either the student or the thesis supervisor can initiate the following procedure, which applies in cases of conflict arising during doctoral studies. Hence, when significant difficulties arise, the thesis supervisor and the student will meet to discuss the problems and find ways to make doctoral supervision more agreeable and efficient.

This meeting will have two possible outcomes:

1. The student and the thesis supervisor discuss the situation and agree to continue working together;
2. The student and the thesis supervisor cannot agree on how the doctoral supervision will proceed.

In the case of the second outcome, a second meeting will be held. This meeting will be attended by the student, the thesis supervisor, and the supervisor of graduate studies [1], except in cases where the supervisor of graduate studies feels that it would be inappropriate to meet with both parties (i.e., in cases of health issues, significant conflict, ethical issues, discrimination, inappropriate behaviour or harassment) [2]. This second meeting will aim to clarify the roles of both student and thesis supervisor, and to try to find solutions so that they can resume working together. In such cases, the parties will explicitly state and agree upon their mutual expectations.

At this point, three options are possible:

1. The student and the thesis supervisor come to an agreement and agree to continue to work together
2. The student and the thesis supervisor continue to disagree
3. The supervisor of graduate studies decides to assign a different thesis supervisor

The thesis supervisor may keep the credits assigned for the time spent supervising the thesis. More specifically, if the change in thesis supervision takes place during the first half of the term, the former thesis supervisor will not receive credit for that supervision during the term. However, if the change in supervision takes place in the second half of the term, the former thesis supervisor will keep the credits associated with supervising the doctoral student during the term.

The new thesis supervisor will not automatically receive credits for the supervision; rather, the director of the School will review the situation and assign credits based on how far along the doctoral thesis has progressed.

Internal policy

The goalsof the comprehensive examination are:

1. To allow the student to acquire knowledge and demonstrate the ability to deepen and integrate theories, concepts and reflection on social intervention practices within the student’s area of interest in social work.
2. To prepare the student for the work required for the thesis project and the thesis itself.

The comprehensive examination comprises two components: a theoretical component and a specific component.

• The goal of the theoretical componentis to allow the student to gain an overall and advanced comprehension of current social work knowledge in the field of the student’s project. The student must demonstrate deep and wide-ranging knowledge and an ability to synthesize, along with a critical and extensive understanding of the principle debates and perspectives in the field or general area. The student must also demonstrate the ability to communicate ideas clearly, both in writing and orally.
• The goal of the specific componentis similar but concerns an area of knowledge more directly linked to the student’s research topic.

Process:

After successfully completing the prerequisite courses, namely SVS 7101, SVS 7102, SVS 7190 and the chosen elective course, the student will write the comprehensive examination (SVS 9997).

Note that the thesis committee must be formed during the second term of doctoral studies, namely before the start of the comprehensive examination process. To this end, the thesis supervisor must complete the online form entitled Thesis Committee Membership and send a copy by email at the School of Social Work secretariat.

Once the student has initially enrolled in the comprehensive examination, the student has at most three terms to write and defend the comprehensive examination, with one additional term possible if the student’s first writing or defence of the comprehensive examination is deemed unsatisfactory (see Section 6 of this document). Within this timeframe, re-enrolment is mandatory every term, until such time as the examination is complete. 

Note that the defence of the comprehensive examination must take place no later than the end of a term, failing which the student must re-enrol in the comprehensive examination the following term (check the Important dates and deadlines for end-of-term dates). If the student does not successfully defend the comprehensive examination, before the end of the fourth term of enrolment in the comprehensive examination, before the end of the fourth term of enrolment in the comprehensive examination, unless there is a justification approved by the thesis director and the director of the graduate studies, the student will receive a failing grade and will be asked to withdraw from the doctoral program.

Note that no defence can be scheduled during the months of July or August, unless exceptional circumstances prevail and only if all members of the committee are available to evaluate the answers and attend the defence.

First term of enrolment

In the typical academic path, the student spends the first term of enrolment in the comprehensive examination to prepare the potential questions and draft a reading list, and to reading the required texts.

1. At the start of the first term of enrolment in the comprehensive examination, the student and the thesis supervisor will draft the comprehensive examination’s potential theoretical and specific questions for the other members of the thesis committee. The committee will discuss these questions, propose changes if necessary, consult with the student, and approve the questions. The committee will have one week to approve the questions.
2. Afterwards, the student will prepare two reading lists (one for each question), each of which will include 20-to-25 major classic and contemporary works: books, journals, articles, etc. The student must submit these reading lists to the thesis supervisor, who will forward them to the other committee members. The thesis committee then has 10 business days to request changes or additions to the proposed reading lists. The committee members each send their comments to the thesis supervisor, following which the thesis supervisor approves the final reading lists and provides them to the student. The student then reads and covers the material in the reading lists.

Second term of enrolment

In the typical academic path, the student spends the second term of the comprehensive examination researching the final questions, drafting answers and preparing for the defence of the comprehensive examination.

3. After completing the readings, the student must propose final questions for the comprehensive examination (one for each component) to the thesis supervisor, who will then send these questions to the other members of the thesis committee for discussion, modifications and approvals, in consultation with the student. The questions should be based on the knowledge acquired in the readings and meet the general objectives and goals of the comprehensive examination (see top of document). The thesis committee has one week to ask for changes or additions to the proposed final questions, after which the thesis supervisor sends the final version of these questions to the student. The drafting of the comprehensive examination begins at that point. Note that the student must receive the final version of these questions no later than two-and-a-half months before the end of the term to avoid having to re-enroll in the comprehensive examination for a further term.
4. Once the student has received the final version of the questions, the student has 30 days to draft answers to the questions posed in the comprehensive examination. The answer to each question should be between 30 and 35 pages (about 10,000 words) double-spaced, not including bibliography. The answers must be drafted without the assistance or guidance of the thesis supervisor or other committee members. The student must submit the answers to the comprehensive examination to the thesis supervisor.
5. As soon as the thesis supervisor receives the answers to the comprehensive examination, he or she must send the student’s answers by email, along with a copy of the form called Thesis Committee Evaluation of the Comprehensive Examination, to each thesis committee member.
6. The thesis committee members (including the thesis supervisor) then have a maximum of four weeks to evaluate the answers to the two questions based on the objectives and goals of the comprehensive examination (see above). Each member completes a copy of the above evaluation form, assigning a mark to each question’s answer, and attaching comments. They then send the completed form to the thesis supervisor. The student and the thesis supervisor must be given enough time to review the evaluators’ written comments before the comprehensive examination defence.
   1. A mark of “P” means that the written answer is satisfactory for the purposes of the defence, while a mark of “F” means that the answer does not meet the criteria for a comprehensive examination defence. If at least two members* of the thesis committee mark the same answer as unsatisfactory, the comprehensive examination will not be considered as ready for defence. In this case, the student may resubmit the written part of the comprehensive examination only once, with the questions remaining the same. This resubmission must occur within the term following receipt of the mark. The revision of the answer(s) must take into consideration the comments and criticism that the thesis committee has issued for the first submission. If following the revision at least two members of the thesis committee again mark the comprehensive examination as unsatisfactory, whether for a single question or both questions, the student will have failed the comprehensive examination and will be asked to withdraw from the program.
   2. *In cases of co-supervision, the evaluation of the co-supervisors will be considered as the evaluation of a single committee member.
7. During the evaluation period, the thesis supervisor is responsible for communicating with the thesis committee members and the student to set a date and time for the comprehensive examination defence. Once the date and time have been set (at latest, at the end of term, as specified in the University calendar), the thesis supervisor will ask the School secretariat to book a room for the defence.

8.   The defence

Unless the student wishes to hold a public defence, the only individuals allowed at the comprehensive examination defence are the student and the members of the thesis committee. The thesis supervisor will chair the defence, which will follow these steps:

• First, the student will take 20-to-25 minutes to briefly present his or her answers to the questions
• Next, the student will answer questions asked by the thesis committee members
• Finally, the thesis committee will ask the student to leave while the committee deliberates.

Verdicts:

1. If the committee members are generally satisfied with the comprehensive examination (even though it could benefit from minor changes), the comprehensive examination will be accepted. After deliberation, the committee members will come to an agreement on the comments and suggestions that the student will need to take into account when working on the thesis.
2. If a single committee member feels that the comprehensive examination is unsatisfactory, the examination will be accepted, but the dissenting evaluator will explain his or her objections and the committee members will need to clearly agree on, and state, which concerns the student will need to address, to their satisfaction, when pursuing the thesis.
3. If two or more committee members agree that the comprehensive examination does not meet the requirements of the program, the student will need to submit a new version and conduct a second defence before the end of the following term. If a mark of “F” is assigned to the second attempt, the student will have failed the comprehensive examination and will be asked to withdraw from the program.

Once the committee members have taken a decision on the verdict and comments, suggestions or concerns that the student will need to address when pursuing the doctoral thesis, the thesis supervisor and committee members will sign the form called Defence of the Comprehensive Examination.

The student is then called back into the room and the thesis supervisor, as chair of the proceedings, describes the results of the committee’s deliberations to the student, and the defence is complete.

After the defense, the thesis supervisor sends a copy of the signed form by email to the School secretariat to record the final grade and index the form in the student’s file. The supervisor keeps the original as well as the members’ comments and recommendations.

IMPORTANT:

If the student fails the oral or written part of the comprehensive examination, the student is allowed only one re-examination, which must take place no later than the end of the following term. If the student fails a second time, the student will be asked to withdraw from the program.

The entire process (written answers, defence and, if necessary, re-examination due to revision requests or failure of the defence) cannot exceed three terms of enrolment in the comprehensive examination.

Policy approved at the Departmental Assembly held on March 27, 2012

Policy revised and approved at the Departmental Assembly held on November 9, 2021

Internal policy

Description

The practicum takes place over two university terms and shall include at least 450 hours in a practice setting, combined with other academic activities (meetings with thesis supervisor and thesis committee, theoretical and conceptual readings). The objective is to produce an applied research project related to the practice setting, including the problematization, theorization and the elaboration of research questions. In some cases, students will propose methodological devices or articulate reflections around methodological devices already in place in the practice setting.

The practicum will conclude with the drafting of a practicum report, which must be submitted to, and orally defend before, the thesis committee. Depending on the practicum situation, students will have three options in drafting the practicum report (see point 7 below). The practicum will allow students to deepen their knowledge of social work theories, practices and policies. Note that students engaged in a practicum are not required to sit the comprehensive examination, which is replaced by the practicum report. In terms of a normal academic path, the practicum generally starts at the beginning of the student’s third term of doctoral studies.

The practicum must be related to the student’s thesis topic.

Given that this is not a practical training internship, students will not be allowed to conduct interventions as social work interns in a practice setting.

General goal of the practicum

The primary goal of the practicum is to help train social work researchers to be at the forefront of social work theories, practices and policies, and acquire advanced knowledge on how these theories, practices and policies are related in a practical setting and on their issues.

Moreover, by allowing students to conduct a practicum at the doctoral level, the School of Social Work aims to assist students in building and maintaining networks in practice settings during their doctoral studies.

Specific goals

Through the practicum

1. students will become more familiar with the relationship between applied research and intervention in social work
2. students will develop and demonstrate their theoretical and conceptual knowledge in social work and the social sciences by pursuing an applied research project
3. students will deepen their knowledge of service organization, and of the social policies and practices, that apply to their thesis topic.

Process

1. Students who intend to complete an applied research practicum must discuss this option with their thesis supervisor as soon as possible. These initial discussions regarding the practicum should take place during the first term of the doctorate, and no later than the start of the term prior to the practicum.
2. The student and the thesis supervisor must agree on the possibility of conducting a practicum. The student is responsible for identifying the practice setting with the support and approval of the thesis supervisor. In terms of discussions about the practicum, the student is responsible for liaising between the thesis supervisor, the contact in the practice setting, and themselves.
3. The practice setting must be identified and a general project must be defined at least six weeks before the start of the practicum. The student then fills out the “Practicum Proposal” form by specifying the practicum setting, the name and title of the contact person in this setting, as well as the title and a brief description of the intended project. This form must be signed by the student, the thesis supervisor, the contact person in the practice setting, and the supervisor of graduate studies, and then must be submitted to the School secretariat.
4. Afterwards, the student will consult the thesis supervisor and the practice setting to prepare a practicum plan (3-to-5 pages excluding bibliography). This plan will include a description of the student’s activities, the time during which the student will be present in the practice setting, an explanation of how the activities relate to the goals of the applied research practicum (see above), a timetable, and a preliminary bibliography of proposed theoretical and conceptual readings. Note that the contact person must approve the project plan before the practicum begins.
5. Four weeks before the start of the practicum, the student will send the practicum plan to the thesis supervisor, who must forward it to the thesis committee members. The thesis committee then has one week to ask for changes or additions to the project. Once the student receives the committee’s comments, he or she has one week to submit the final version of the practicum plan, which must then be approved by the thesis committee before the student begins the practicum. The approved practicum plan must be sent to the School secretariat by the thesis supervisor, who must attach the “Practicum Proposal” form.
6. Having successfully completed the mandatory courses (namely SVS 7101, SVS 7102, SVS 7190) and an elective course, the student can officially enrol in the Practicum (SVS 9901). To receive credit for the practicum, the student must simultaneously be enrolled in the Comprehensive Examination (SVS 9997). Although this double enrolment is mandatory, note that the student completing a practicum will not need to sit the comprehensive examination, which is replaced by the practicum report (see next point).
7. The entire practicum takes place over two university terms. At least six weeks before the end of the second term of enrolment in the practicum, the student must submit a practicum report to the thesis supervisor. This report will be 60-to-70 pages, double-spaced, and approximately 20,000 words. It will contain the following elements, depending on the particulars of the practicum: 
   1. When the practicum aims to develop an applied research project, the practicum report must include:
      •  a description of the activities conducted;
      • a research problem related to the aim of the proposed applied research project (including a literature review, a structured and in-depth theoretical discussion on the applied research topic, a theoretical and conceptual framework, and the research questions);
      • a summary of the methodology
      • a synthesis of the lesson learned, presented as a problem-centred reflection that takes into account the practice setting.
   2. When a student enrols in a practicum as part of an applied research project already in place in a practice setting, the practicum report must include:
      • a description of the activities conducted;
      • a research problem related to topic of the applied research (including a literature review, a structured and in-depth theoretical discussion of the applied research topic, a theoretical and conceptual framework, and the research questions);
      • a discussion of the methodology and, if possible, of the analysis of the results;
      • a synthesis of the lessons learned, presented as a problem-based reflection that takes into account the practice setting.
   3. If no applied research can be conducted in the practice setting, the practicum report must include:
      • a description of the activities conducted;
      • a problem-based synthesis of the learning opportunities conducted during the practicum, based on a literature review and structure theoretical framework. This synthesis may deal with a specific problem addressed in the practice setting in which the student is conducting the practicum (e.g. homelessness, mental health, poverty, violence, etc.) or on specific practices (e.g., a given program, the implementation of new practices, etc.);
      • a problem-based discussion of the environment in which the practicum takes place, based on an advanced and critical theoretical review of the social and/or institutional issues and policies that affect the practice. For example, this discussion could deal with new public management of social work and its influence on social worker practices, or with immigration policies and their impact on the clients of a help centre for immigrants.
      • The identification of research questions and a brief description of the methodology that could be used to answer such questions.
8. The thesis supervisor promptly sends the practicum report, along with the online form entitled “Thesis Committee Evaluation of the Practicum report”, to each member of the thesis committee. The thesis supervisor also sends a copy of the practicum report to the contact person in the practice setting; although this individual does not evaluate the report or project, they must be invited to attend the defence.
9. The members of the thesis committee (including the thesis supervisor) then have at most four weeks to evaluate the report based on the goals of an applied research practicum. The evaluation is based on the goals stated in the first section of this document and depends on the type of practicum (see 7A, 7B or 7C) and the practicum research project approved by the thesis committee. The completed form must be sent to the thesis supervisor. The student and the thesis supervisor must be granted a reasonable amount of time to review the evaluators’ written comments before the defence of the practicum report is held.
   • A mark of “P” means “satisfactory for defence”, while a mark of “F” means “unsatisfactory for defence”. If two or more members of the thesis committee mark the report as unsatisfactory, the report will be considered unsuitable for defence. In this case, the student will be allowed to rewrite and resubmit the practicum report, but only once and this resubmission must take place during the term following receipt of the initial unsatisfactory mark. The rewritten report must take into account the comments and criticisms the thesis committee made about the initial report. If two or more committee members assign a mark of “F” to the resubmitted report, the student has failed the practicum and will be asked to withdraw from the program.
   • *In the case of co-supervision, the two co-supervisors’ comments and criticism are considered equal to those of a single committee member.
10. During the evaluation period, the thesis supervisor is responsible for contacting the thesis committee members, the contact person in the practice setting, and the student to set a date and time for the defence of the practicum report. Once this date and time have been set (no later than the end of term stated in the University calendar), the thesis supervisor will ask the School secretariat to reserve a room.
11. The defence

Unless the student has asked for a public defence, the only people allowed to attend the defence of the practicum report are the student, the thesis committee members and the contact person from the practice setting. The thesis supervisor chairs the defence, which follows the steps outlined below:

• First, the student will take 20-to-25 minutes to briefly present the report
• Next, the student will answer questions asked by the thesis committee members and the contact person from the practice setting
• Finally, the thesis committee will ask the student to leave while the committee deliberates.

Verdicts:

1. If the committee members are generally satisfied with the practicum report (even if it could benefit from minor changes), the report is accepted. After deliberating, the committee members will come to an agreement on the comments and suggestions that the student will need to take into account when working on the thesis.
2. If a single committee member feels that the practicum report is unsatisfactory, the report will be accepted, but the dissenting evaluator will explain his or her objections and the committee members will need to clearly agree on, and state, which concerns the student will need to address, to their satisfaction, when pursuing the thesis.
3. If two or more committee members agree that the practicum report does not meet the requirements of the program, the student will need to rewrite the report and conduct a second defence before the end of the following term. If the second attempt receives a mark of unsatisfactory (“F”), the student will have failed the practicum and will be asked to withdraw from the program.

Once the committee members have taken a decision on the verdict and agreed to the comments, suggestions or concerns that the student will need to address when pursuing the doctoral thesis, the thesis supervisor and committee members will sign the online form called Defence of the Practicum Report.

The student is then called back into the committee room and the thesis supervisor, as chair of the proceedings, describes the results of the committee’s deliberations to the student, and the defence is complete.

After the defence, the thesis supervisor submits the signed form, along with the attached comments and recommendations, to the School secretariat, who enters the final mark for SVS 9997 (verdicts A and B = mark of “P”, for satisfactory; verdict C = mark of “F”, for unsatisfactory.)

IMPORTANT:

If the student fails the oral or written part of the practicum, the student is allowed only one second attempt, which must take place no later than the end of the following term. If the student fails the second attempt, the student will be asked to withdraw from the program.

The entire process (practicum report, defence and, if necessary, rewriting due to revision requests or failure of the defence) cannot exceed three terms of enrolment in the practicum.

Policy approved at the departmental assembly held on January 17, 2017

Internal policy

1. After successfully completing the comprehensive examination (SVS 9997) or the practicum (SVS 9901), the student enrols in the research project (SVS 9998). Normally, the student has two terms, with a maximum of a third term, to complete the research project. The student will not be able to submit a request to the ethics committee or independently collect data before the thesis committee authorizes the project. In case of failure, the student will only be allowed one term to resubmit the research project, and a second failure will result in the student being asked to withdraw from the program. Unless there is a justification approved by the thesis director and the director of the graduate studies, the student will receive a failing grade and will be asked to withdraw from the doctoral program.
2. In the research project report, which should be 30 pages, double-spaced, the student will describe the research problem, the research goals, question(s) and hypotheses, the theoretical framework, methodology, potential contribution to the advancement of knowledge, a provisional thesis plan and a bibliography. The student may consult members of the thesis committee when preparing the research project but not once the student has submitted the report to the thesis supervisor. This submission must take place at least six weeks before the end of term (check the end-of-term dates in the university calendar). 
3. Once the thesis supervisor receives the research project report, he or she will send it, along with the form entitled Evaluation of the Research Project, to the other members of the thesis committee for evaluation. The thesis committee members have 15 working days to evaluate the research project and return the form containing their written comments to the thesis supervisor, who will pass these forms on to the student. The thesis supervisor and the student must be given sufficient time to review the evaluators’ comments before the defence of the research project, which must take place before the end of the term (check the end-of-term dates in the university calendar).
4. During the evaluation period, the thesis supervisor is responsible for contacting the thesis committee members and the student to set a date and time for the defence of the research project. Once this date and time are set, the thesis supervisor contacts the School secretariat to reserve a room.
5. When evaluating the written project report, a mark of “P” will mean “satisfactory for the purpose of presenting a defence” and “F” will mean “unsatisfactory for the purpose of presenting a defence.” If two or more thesis committee members* mark the research project as unsatisfactory, the project will be not be considered suitable for defence. In this case, the student will be allowed to re-submit a project report, but only once. The re-submission must take place during the term following receipt of a mark of “F”. The re-submitted project report must take into account the thesis committee’s comments and criticisms of the first submission. An unsatisfactory mark for a second submission will result in a failing mark and the student will be asked to withdraw from the program.

*In the case of co-supervision, the opinions of both co-supervisors will be considered equal to one committee member vote.

6. The defence

Unless the student requests that the defence be public, the only individuals allowed to attend the research project defence are the student and the thesis committee members. The thesis supervisor chairs the research project defence, which proceeds as described below:

• First, the student will take 20-to-25 minutes to briefly present the research project
• Next, the student will answer questions asked by the thesis committee members
• Finally, the thesis committee will ask the student to leave while the committee deliberates

Verdicts

1. If the committee members are generally satisfied with the research project report (even if it could benefit from minor changes), the report will be accepted. After deliberation, the committee members will come to an agreement on the comments and suggestions that the student will need to take into account when working on the thesis.
2. If a single committee member feels that the research project is unsatisfactory, the report will be accepted, but the dissenting evaluator will explain his or her objections and the committee members will need to clearly agree on, and state, which concerns the student will need to address, to their satisfaction, when pursuing the thesis.
3. If two or more committee members agree that the research project does not meet the requirements of the program, the student will need to rewrite the report and conduct a second defence before the end of the following term. If a mark of unsatisfactory (“F”) is assigned to the second attempt, the student will have failed the research project and will be asked to withdraw from the program.

Once the committee members have taken a decision on the verdict, and on the comments, suggestions or concerns that the student will need to address when pursuing the doctoral thesis, the thesis supervisor and committee members will sign the form called Defence of a Research Project.

The student is then called back into the committee room and the thesis supervisor, as chair of the proceedings, describes the results of the committee’s deliberations to the student, and the defence is complete.

After the defense, the thesis supervisor sends the signed form by email to the School secretariat for the entry of the final grade and the indexing in the student’s file. The supervisor keeps the original as well as the members’ comments and recommendations and must give a copy to the student for their ethics protocol.

IMPORTANT:

If the student fails the oral or written part of research project, the student will only be allowed one more attempt, which must take place no later than the end of the following term.

The entire process (written report, defence and if necessary, second attempt if a rewriting or re-defence is required) can take no more than two terms of enrolment in the research project.

Policy approved by the Departmental Assembly on March 27, 2012.

Policy revised and approved by the Departmental Assembly on November 9, 2021.

Internal policy

Description

The School of Social Work offers students the option of pursuing an article-based thesis. The following policy describes this type of thesis, explains the approvals required when a student chooses to conduct an article based-thesis, and outlines the regulations that apply to an article-based thesis.

An article-based thesis comprises at least three articles or book chapters. It must meet the same intellectual standards and scientific rigour as a monograph thesis, and must contribute to the advancement of knowledge. The procedures for submitting, evaluating, and defending an article-based thesis are the same as those for a monograph thesis. Note that decisions regarding the quality of the articles or book chapters are taken by the members of the thesis jury, not by the peer-reviewers of the journals or books to which the articles or chapters have been submitted. Finally, as is the case for the monograph thesis, the article-based thesis will be archived in the University of Ottawa library.

Process

1. As is the case for a monograph thesis, a student pursuing an article-based thesis must fulfill all the necessary prerequisites (mandatory courses, comprehensive examination, and thesis proposal).
2. The student must obtain approval to pursue an article-based thesis. Ideally, the decision to pursue an article-based thesis should be taken while the student is preparing their thesis project. During the first month of enrollment in the thesis (SVS 9999) at the latest, and after consulting with the thesis supervisor (and thesis co-supervisor, if applicable), the student must submit a plan outlining the content of each of the articles or chapters to the supervisor of graduate programs (a description of one page maximum per article or chapter). The student must fill out the Approval to Pursue an Article-based Thesis form. This form must be signed by the student, the thesis supervisor (and co-supervisor, if applicable), and the School’s supervisor of graduate programs, and then submitted to the School’s secretariat. If the student decides later in their doctoral process to switch to an article-based thesis, the decision to allow the change will be left to the discretion of the thesis supervisor and committee, and eventually the person responsible for graduate programs.
3. The student will then pursue the article-based thesis in accordance with the following regulations:
   1. The article-based thesis must comprise at least three articles or book chapters that have been either submitted, accepted for publication, or published in peer-reviewed journals or books. Articles or chapters submitted for publication in non-peer-reviewed journals or books will not be accepted;
   2. The articles or chapters that form part of the thesis must not have been submitted before the student defends their thesis proposal;
   3. Before submitting the articles or chapters, the student must ensure that the journal or book editors will allow the submitted texts to be included as part of a thesis;
   4. Articles or chapters submitted to a journal or publication that is edited or co-edited by the thesis supervisor (or co-supervisor, if applicable) will be accepted only if they can be independently evaluated. If this is the case, the thesis supervisor (or co-supervisor if applicable) must indicate in the thesis, in a statement prior to the article in question, they there was no interference in the peer-review process.  
   5. The student must be the sole author of at least two of the articles or chapters. The other text may be written by more than one author (including the thesis supervisor or co-supervisor, if applicable), but the student must be the lead author, meaning that the student must have written most of the content and played the principal role in collecting and analyzing the data and in editing the work (at least 50%). A description of the student’s contribution to the work, and the contributions of each co-author, must be explained in an introductory paragraph at the beginning of the article (see below for more detail). If they are not themselves among the co-authors of the article or book chapter, the thesis supervisor (and co-supervisor, if applicable) must approve the co-authors of the work. If the thesis supervisor (or co-supervisor, if applicable) is among the co-authors, the list of co-authors must be approved by a third party, namely the supervisor of graduate programs or the director of the School^[1];Two scenarios are possible:
   6. the thesis supervisor or co-supervisor is also the supervisor of graduate programs, in which case the decision falls to the director of the School, or
   7. the thesis supervisor or co-supervisor is also the director of the School, in which case the decision falls to the supervisor of graduate programs.
   8. Jury members (aside from the thesis supervisor and co-supervisor, if applicable) may not co-author any of the articles or chapters.
   9. The articles can be written in either English or French. However, all the other chapters of the thesis should be written in one language only, whether English or French. For articles that are written in a language that is different than the majority language of the thesis, a short abstract of that article should be provided, in the majority language of the thesis.

Structure

1. The minimum length of the thesis must be 150 pages, double-spaced, 12-point Times New Roman, not including the bibliography, appendices, and preliminary pages (table of contents, acknowledgements, foreword, etc.).
2. If one or more of the articles have already been published prior to the completion of the thesis, they should not be included in same format as the journal. The articles must follow the same layout as the rest of the thesis (i.e., double spaced, 12-point Times New Roman).
3. The thesis should contain only one bibliography. The bibliographies at the end of each paper must be extracted and merged into a single bibliography at the end of the thesis.
4. In the case of a co-authored paper, there should be a statement at the beginning regarding the student’s role. There should also be a statement at the beginning of each paper explaining the status of the publication (i.e., whether the paper has been submitted, accepted, or published).
5. There are different ways to structure a thesis by article. Here are some examples:
   1. Example 1:
      • Preliminary pages (abstract, acknowledgements, table of contents, etc.)
      • A long introduction that addresses: the problem and its contextualization; a literature review; the theoretical orientations of the thesis; a description of the methodology used; the main arguments of the thesis that link all the articles and that highlight the coherence of the thesis.
      • A minimum of three articles, each presented as its own chapter.
      • A long conclusion that provides: an overall discussion of the papers; an analysis of the main points and/or general implications of the thesis for practice and/or policy and/or future research; contributions of the thesis to the fields of knowledge.
      • Bibliography
      • Appendices
   2. Example 2:
      • Preliminary pages (abstract, acknowledgements, table of contents, etc.)
      • An introduction that addresses: the problem and its contextualization; a literature review; the main arguments of the thesis that link all the articles and highlight the coherence of the thesis.
      • A theory chapter that discusses the theoretical orientations of the thesis.
      • A methodology chapter that discusses the methodology used.
      • A minimum of three articles, each presented as its own chapter.
      • A discussion that provides an overall analysis of the articles and their main points and/or the general results.
      • A conclusion that discusses the implications of the thesis for practice and/or policy and/or future research, and the contributions of the thesis to fields of knowledge.
      • Bibliography
      • Appendices
   3. Example 3:
      • Preliminary pages (Abstract, Acknowledgements, Table of Contents, etc.)
      • An introduction that addresses: the problem and its contextualization; a literature review; the main arguments of the thesis that link all the articles and highlight the coherence of the thesis.
      • A theory and methodology chapter that discusses the theoretical orientations of the thesis, as well as the methodology used.
      • A minimum of three articles, each presented as its own chapter.
      • A conclusion that provides: an overall discussion of the papers; an analysis of the main points and/or general implications of the thesis for practice and/or policy and/or future research; contributions of the thesis to the fields of knowledge.
      • Bibliography
      • Appendices

Please note that the above examples are only suggestions; the student will have to decide on the structure with the thesis supervisor (or co-supervisor, if applicable). For students who are not doing fieldwork and are engaging in theoretical research, the structure of the thesis may be different, and the models described above may or may not be applied. For example, students doing theoretical work may not have a detailed methodology, and the theoretical orientations and discussions might be found in each of the articles. If this is the case, and the student has fewer ‘linking’ chapters, the student may decide to write more than 3 articles in order to have a thesis that meets the page requirements. In such cases, up to five articles might be appropriate.

Revised policy voted by the departmental assembly on October 20, 2022.

Policy approved by the departmental assembly of April 19, 2016.

Note: