Spring Review Information

Overview

An oral review is required for all graduate students in the spring of their first year in residence. The Review is chaired by a faculty member of the Graduate Committee and conducted by the student's supervisory committee.

The Review is intended to be supportive; its purpose is to review the student's academic progress during the academic year, to assess her / his ability to articulate thoughts in a disciplined manner, to lay research plans, to review administrative (e.g. course programme) and financial arrangements, and to establish an agenda for subsequent work. A statement about the agenda and conduct of the spring review is given to students well in advance.

The members of the Review Committee comprise the members of the student's supervisory committee plus a Chair drawn from among the faculty members of the Graduate Committee. For M.A. and M.Sc. students, it is necessary to have three members of the supervisory committee available for the Review; for Ph.D. students, the three internal members of the supervisory committee should be available for the Review.

Students and supervisors should meet in early Term 2 to discuss the Review, and to prepare the necessary statement. Once the Graduate Committee has set the dates for the Review students and supervisors should consult with other members of the supervisory committee to confirm the date and time for the Review.

Preparing for the Review

Prior to the Spring Review (preferably 2-3 days in advance), and after consultation with the supervisor, the student should circulate to the Review Committee a statement which includes:

1. A list of courses completed in the previous year (course number and short title), and results (incompletes should also be noted). It is often helpful to include titles of term papers (where appropriate) and a two- or three-sentence summary of each one.
2. A list of courses planned for the summer and ensuing year(s).
3. Financial support: (a) during the year under review, including TA duties (if appropriate); (b) for the year ahead.
4. A concise thesis outline or proposal (Masters and Doctoral) or comment on major essay, including a draft timetable.
   (This is usually no more than a page or two at most.)
5. Post-graduation plans (further research, application deadlines etc.).
6. Safety plan for fieldwork, to be discussed with supervisor.
   See 09/10 Safety Proposal (doc) and important safety policies and information (last section on page).

Agenda for the Review Meeting

Remember that the Spring Review is intended to do at least three things:

• monitor a student's progress
• evaluate that progress
• establish an agenda for subsequent work

Any grounds for concern about the student's work should be explored carefully and constructively. The following specific matters should be touched upon:

1. Courses Completed or in Progress:
   Review of course results and performance; firm dates for completion of incompletes; contribution of course work programme to personal intellectual development; courses completed; and programme requirements.
2. Courses Planned:
   Rationale for proposed schedule; programme requirements and necessary training (Faculty of Graduate Studies/comprehensives/archival or field work plans); and work load.
3. Statement of Research Plan:
   • For Non-Thesis Masters:
     (a) Areas to be covered in the comprehensive examination; type of examination (oral /written /combination); date of examination; and plans for major essay(s) and relation to field in the discipline.
   • For Masters with Thesis:
     (b) Outline of thesis research plans, relation of thesis or major essay topic to a field within geography; and feasibility of thesis plans.
   • For Doctoral Candidates:
     Elements of both (a) and (b) may be relevant.
4. Financial Support:
   Assistantship, fellowship, etc. for summer and the following year; special needs for field or archival work; and source and adequacy of support.
5. Language Requirement:
   Decision yes or no in the first year.
6. Research Presentation:
   Masters students (public defence of Doctoral thesis).
7. Any Other Business
   (after which student withdraws).

Review Report

1. The report is prepared by the supervisor within one week of the Spring Review meeting. The above format should be followed, preceded by an overall assessment of the student's work. The student should see the draft report and may append a note of clarification, comment, etc.
2. A copy of the report, signed by all members of the Committee and by the student is distributed to each member of the Committee, the student and the Chair of the Graduate Committee (for the student's file).

Unsatisfactory Review

If on the basis of course marks or other indications, a student's progress appears unsatisfactory, this Review may be the basis for a decision about the student's continuation in the programme. If the oral review is unsatisfactory, it may be repeated within a month. If the Review and the student's general academic progress are still judged to be unsatisfactory, the student will be required to withdraw from the Faculty of Graduate Studies.

Other Information

Full-time Master's students who fail to complete their programme by December 1 following their second year of residence will have a mandatory review before the end of that calendar year to consider progress, problems and prospects for completion. Full-time Doctoral students who fail to complete by December 1 following their fourth year in the doctoral programme will also have a mandatory review before the end of that calendar year to consider progress, problems and prospects for completion.

Students in the second year of a Master's programme are not expected to have a second oral review; however, resident Master's students who are applying for admission to the Ph.D. programme will normally be asked to meet with a committee to review their Master's work and to assess Ph.D. plans (see guidelines for Ph.D. programme).