PhD degree requirements are determined by the candidate’s year of entry into the program. Students who choose the manuscript-based dissertation option should become familiar with the graduate program’s article-based dissertation guidelines (.pdf).
Doctoral Timeline
This planning tool is meant to represent the major degree requirements with some suggested timelines for their completion within a 5-year timeframe. Student circumstances vary. Please take that into account when working with this planning guide.
- Coursework (equivalent of 8 half courses including):
- SOCI 6001 3.0: Doctoral Seminar I
- SOCI 6002 3.0: Doctoral Seminar II (2nd year winter term)
- SOCI XXXX: Methods (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Methods (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Theory (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Theory (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Elective
- SOCI XXXX: Elective
- Comprehensive exams (2 comprehensive exams are required)
- PhD Proposal
- Research Ethics Approval (for original empirical research involving human participants)
- Dissertation and Defence
| Fall Year 1–Coursework • PhD Seminar 1 • Insert course selections | Winter Year 1–Coursework • Insert Course Selections | Summer Year 1–Coursework • Insert Course selections |
| Fall Year 2–Coursework/comp • Insert course selections • First comp might begin here • Establishment of comp committee | Winter Year 2–Comp • PhD Seminar 2 • First comp begins, continues, or is completed • Second comp might begin here • PhD Supervisor MUST be identified and paperwork submitted to the Grad Program Office Coursework Completed | Summer Year 2–Comp • First comp is completed • Second comp begins, continues, or is completed • Establishment of a second comp committee |
| Fall Year 3–Comp • Second comp is completed Comprehensive Exams Completed | Winter Year 3–Dissertation Proposal and Research Ethics • Dissertation proposal and ethics begin • Full supervisory committee must be identified and paperwork submitted to the Grad Program Office Full Doctoral Supervisory Committee Established and Approved | Summer Year 3–Dissertation Proposal and Research Ethics • Dissertation research • Data collection and analysis Dissertation Proposal and Ethics Approved |
| Fall Year 4–Dissertation Research • Data collection and analysis | Winter Year 4–Dissertation Research • Data collection, analysis, and chapter writing | Summer Year 4–Dissertation Research • Analysis, chapter writing, revisions |
| Fall Year 5–Dissertation Research • Analysis, chapter writing, final revisions | Winter Year 5–Dissertation Research • Final revisions • Doctoral defence | Summer Year 5–Dissertation Research • Final revisions • Doctoral defence Degree Completed |
The Doctoral Seminar
This requirement is met by completing SOCI 6001 3.0: Doctoral Seminar I: Professional Development Workshop Series in the first year and SOCI 6002 3.0: Doctoral Seminar II: Professional Development Workshop Series in the second year. The overall objectives of these workshop-based courses are: (i) the development of professional skills for the academic and non-academic labor market; (ii) to facilitate timely progress through the program; and (iii) to contribute to the development of a research culture in the cohort and beyond.
Course Requirements
Four full courses, or equivalent, chosen from those offered at the 6000 level and including Doctoral Seminars I and II.
Within these four full courses or the equivalent, students are required to complete a full course in theory and a full course in methods.
Courses which meet the theory requirement are: 6130; 6132; 6135; 6160; 6170; 6180; 6190; 6192; 6195; 6196; 6200; 6201; 6204 ; 6810; 6894.
Courses that meet the methods requirement are 6060; 6086; 6090; 6095; 6096; 6112; 6120; 6121; and 6150.
The program is only able to offer a select number of theory and methods courses during any academic year. As a result, not all of the courses that meet the theory and methods requirements will be available for you to enroll in.
All courses are chosen from those offered at the 6000 level. With the Director’s permission, students may take the equivalent of one full reading course (Sociology 6900) and/or the equivalent of one full course in another graduate program.
Supervisory Committee
At the core of a student’s program is the formation of a three–person graduate faculty supervisory committee. This committee is a way to establish and maintain close contact with faculty members who share similar orientations and interests. While the committee is particularly important when working on the dissertation, if it is in place early enough, the members can also act as academic advisors. Within the general parameters of program requirements, the supervisory committee is largely responsible for advising students on a course of study appropriate to their interests, assessing their work and progress, and for professional mentoring.
The specific composition of the supervisory committee is in the student’s own hands, subject to the Director’s approval and general Faculty of Graduate Studies regulations which specify the categories of membership that must be filled. Briefly stated:
The PhD supervisory committee MUST consist of a minimum of three members from the Faculty of Graduate Studies, at least two of whom must be from sociology. The principal supervisor must be from sociology. In exceptional circumstances, the third, or an additional, member who does not have an appointment to the Faculty of Graduate Studies may be included, but this requires prior approval by the Dean.
Faculty of Graduate Studies regulations state that PhD students must have a supervisor in place no later than their fifth term of study. Doctoral supervisory committees must be formed no later than the student’s eighth term of study. Students who do not meet these deadlines will be unable to register unless the supervisor and/or supervisory committee has been approved.
Students must submit a completed supervisor and supervisory committee approval form to the program office in order for their supervisor and supervisory committee to be formally approved.
The York Sociology Graduate Association, with help from the program members, has developed some guidelines (.pdf) to assist you in both choosing and meeting potential committee members.
Comprehensive Requirements
Goals
The comprehensive exams mark the divide between coursework and the dissertation. The student is expected to demonstrate a broad and synthetic knowledge of the comprehensive area, including the major theoretical approaches and, in substantive areas, the broad findings of empirical research, their limitations, and new directions. However, comprehensive knowledge is not the same as the exhaustive knowledge of a specialist in a field. A student’s comprehensives can help define the dissertation project, by providing a broad background, but they should not be conceived as a part of the dissertation, which is necessarily much more specialized. Students have three options for completing their comprehensive requirements which are described in detail below. The program’s comprehensive areas are major fields of sociology in which there is faculty expertise and regular graduate teaching. The program maintains a list of the comprehensive areas, along with the names of available faculty in each area.
Because it is not sensible to codify every aspect of the exams in formal requirements, the program office maintains a “tip sheet” (.pdf) to help facilitate the process.
Logistics
Each comprehensive is guided and examined by a three-person committee, all of whom must hold an appointment in the Faculty of Graduate Studies. At least two of the committee members, including the supervisor/chair of the comprehensive committee, must be appointed to the Graduate Program in Sociology with at least one of these members have declared themselves an expert in the comprehensive field being examined (see list of pre–approved comprehensive areas (.pdf)). Although it is not a requirement, the program encourages overlap in the faculty membership on students’ two comprehensive exam committees and their dissertation committees. Each comprehensive exam is to be completed in one term, aligned with the fall, winter, or summer terms of the academic calendar. Due dates for different aspects of the comprehensive requirements will be available annually and must be followed. The due dates do not preclude the student and committee from agreeing on a shorter time frame. Normally, the student’s first comprehensive will be in her fourth term of study and both comprehensive requirements should be completed no later than the sixth term of full-time study. The comprehensive requirements must be completed before the dissertation proposal is approved. To ensure timely completion, students should organize the comprehensive committee for their first exam about two months prior to the end of their last course (see the tip sheet (.pdf) for more suggestions).
Timetable
The dates in the table below are the final deadlines. The committee, in consultation with the student, has the flexibility to make arrangements for earlier submission of the written work and examination.
| Fall | Winter | Summer | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper Option | |||
| Term start date | Sept. 1 | Jan. 1 | May 1 |
| The last date to submit the reading list, rationale, and comp pre-approval form to the Program Office | Sept. 15 | Jan. 15 | May 15 |
| Last date to submit written work | Dec. 5 | Apr. 5 | Aug. 5 |
| Last date for oral and adjudication | Dec. 19 | Apr. 19 | Aug. 19 |
| Last date for specified revisions | Jan. 2 | Apr. 30 | Aug. 31 |
| Course Outline Option | |||
| Term start date | Sept. 1 | Jan. 1 | May 1 |
| The last date to submit the reading list, rationale, and comp pre-approval form to the Program Office | Sept. 15 | Jan. 15 | May 15 |
| Last date to submit written work | Dec. 5 | Apr. 5 | Aug. 5 |
| Last date for oral and Adjudication | Dec. 19 | Apr. 19 | Aug. 19 |
| Last date for specified revisions | Jan. 2 | Apr. 30 | Aug. 31 |
| Take-Home Exam Option | |||
| Term start date | Sept. 1 | Jan. 1 | May 1 |
| The last date to submit the reading list, rationale, and comp pre-approval form to the Program Office | Sept. 15 | Jan. 15 | May 15 |
| List of potential questions to be received by the committee | Sept. 15 | Jan. 15 | May 15 |
| Last date for take-home exam questions to be received by the student | Nov. 29 | Mar. 29 | July 29 |
| Last date to submit written answers (based on 7 days to write) | Dec. 6 | Apr. 5 | Aug. 5 |
| Last date for oral and Adjudication | Dec. 19 | Apr. 19 | Aug. 19 |
Options and Content
There are three distinct routes students can take to complete a comprehensive requirement: (1) completing a paper; (2) designing a course outline accompanied by the final lecture; and (3) a take-home exam to be completed over a seven-day period. Option 2 (course outline and lecture) can ONLY be used for completing one of the comprehensives. All three options follow the same timeline and all require the preparation of, and committee agreement with, a reading list equivalent to about 25 medium-sized books, with articles counting for about one-fifth of a book. Normally, the readings will consist mainly of foundational works in the area and broad contemporary scholarship. Up to one-quarter of the readings may be a more specialized area of particular interest to the student. To assist with the preparation of the reading list, the program office maintains reading lists from previous exams. The committee evaluates the written work and meets to examine the student in an oral discussion. Usually, the student will make a brief presentation, to be followed by questions from the committee. The committee’s evaluation of the comprehensive exam includes both the written component and the oral discussion.
The comprehensive process cannot begin until the Program Office has a copy of the student’s comprehensive pre-approval form, signed by all comprehensive committee members.
Paper Option
The written comprehensive paper option is intended to be a review of the research in the comprehensive area you have chosen. The paper (7,500 to 10,000 words, excluding references) must demonstrate a broad, comprehensive understanding of the area, provide an accurate synthesis of key debates, and include a critical assessment of these debates. Consider questions such as the following in the paper (these will also be helpful in guiding your reading):
- How do you define the area and what are the problems/issues addressed by the area?
- What is the intellectual context/climate of the area? Has there been a major paradigm shift in the area? What is the general current direction of the area?
- What are the main themes, debates, or issues expressed in the literature?
- How do different theoretical and/or methodological approaches in the area take up these themes, debates, or issues?
- For more empirically-based areas: What are the major findings? What is your assessment of empirical knowledge in the area? What empirical research would move the area forward?
- How do you position yourself in relation to the intellectual debates in the area and why?
- What are the current limitations/gaps of the area?
Course Outline and Final Lecture Option
NOTE: This option may be used to complete only one of the two comprehensives.
This option for completing the comprehensive requirement entails the preparation of a course outline and a final lecture. The course should be pitched to the third or fourth-year undergraduate level. The course outline must include
- a detailed academic rationale for the organization of the course, providing broad coverage of the area;
- specific topics for 24 two-hour lectures – including lecture topic titles and 3 to 5 bulletin points on each topic indicating the main objectives or themes of the lecture;
- a rationale for the selection of topics;
- readings to accompany each session, typically 2 to 4 essays or book chapters. Often, the challenge is finding insightful readings accessible to undergraduates.
In addition, the student writes a final lecture (approximately 8000 words in length) that identifies the broad character and development of the area, major theoretical approaches, empirical findings where appropriate, and directions the area can take to advance theoretically and empirically. It is appropriate for the student to express her judgments, but the main emphasis is on demonstrating comprehensive knowledge of the area. The lecture should be pitched to undergraduates and is not the same as the advanced synthesis expected for the paper option.
A unique challenge of this option is to convey comprehensive knowledge at a level appropriate to advanced undergraduate students, without oversimplifying the ideas or findings. The readings and lecture topics should be appropriate for undergraduates, and there too the concern is to provide deep and insightful readings that are also accessible to students at that level.
Preparing a course outline provides an opportunity to think through comprehensiveness in a pedagogical context. This could be useful in preparing the student to teach in the area. In addition to the requirements above, designing a university course usually involves additional materials, such as topics for tutorial sessions and assignments. With the agreement of her committee, these may be included in the comprehensive, but they are not required.
Take Home Exam Option
The take-home exam is comprised of two questions. Students will respond to these questions in 3000-4000 words, each, over the course of one week (7 days). The questions will be designed to elicit responses that reflect an understanding of the major debates in the area and provide the student with an opportunity to demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge of the area.
By the specified deadline, students will submit to the program office: a reading list; a 300-500-word rationale for the list; and 3-5 exam questions, all of which will be developed by the student in consultation with their comprehensive supervisor and committee members. As with the paper option outlined above, here too students are encouraged to consider questions such as the following:
- How do you define the area and what are the problems/issues addressed by the area?
- What is the intellectual context/climate of the area? Has there been a major paradigm shift in the area? What is the general current direction of the area?
- What are the main themes, debates, or issues expressed in the literature?
- How do different theoretical and/or methodological approaches in the area take up these themes, debates, or issues?
- For more empirically-based areas: What are the major findings? What is your assessment of empirical knowledge in the area? What empirical research would move the area forward?
- How do you position yourself in relation to the intellectual debates in the area and why?
- What are the current limitations/gaps of the area?
For the exam, the committee will assign two questions, based on the issues covered by the questions developed in conjunction with the student. The committee will assess the responses, hold an oral discussion, and make an evaluation by the advertised deadline.
Evaluation of the Comprehensive
It is the responsibility of the student’s comprehensive exam committee to organize the evaluation of the student’s work. In each area, a student must demonstrate competence through her written work. Assessment of the written work is to be completed in the context of an oral discussion of the area between the student and her entire comprehensive exam committee. This will include a presentation by the student, followed by questions.
For the paper option and the course outline and the final lecture option, the committee’s decision will be either: “pass”; “pass with the submission of acceptable revisions” (to be submitted within 10 days of the exam), or “fail”. As well as being feasible within the 10 days, the committee must be able to specify the revisions in a small number of points. Decisions of the committee are by majority vote. In the case of failure, the committee supervisor will provide the student with feedback and guidance. The student should aim to be re-examined in the area, by the original committee members, in the next academic term.
For the take-home exam option, the decision will be either “pass” or “fail”. In the case of failure for the take-home exam option, the student should be re-examined, by the original committee members, at the next scheduled exam date. The reexamination should be based on the original list of 3-5 questions.
An area requirement is considered passed if no more than one member of the committee casts a negative vote. Two failures on the same exam will require the student to withdraw from the Program.
When the student has passed the oral exam, they must submit the following to the graduate program office:
(i) Comprehensive Exam Approval Form
(ii) Electronic copy of the comprehensive
The Appeals Process
An appeal can be made on the basis of serious medical or compassionate reasons. The appeal must be submitted electronically to the Program Office and cc’d to the student’s comprehensive exam committee, within 3 working days of the missed comprehensive exam deadline [to submit written work] and must include a written rationale for not meeting the deadline and a revised date for completion. The appeal will be heard by the Graduate Program Awards and Appeals Committee and a decision will be rendered within one week of receipt of the appeal. The granting of an appeal does not affect already established deadlines for subsequent comprehensive exams.
Unless an appeal has been granted, a comprehensive exam will be deemed as a “fail” if the oral exam is not successfully completed within the required time period – that is, by the “Last Date for Oral and Adjudication”.”
Dissertation Proposal
Students must develop an acceptable dissertation proposal. When this has been approved by the supervisory committee, the following must be submitted to the graduate program office:
- Dissertation Proposal Form (TD1)
- FGS Human Participants Research Form (TD2)
- Appendix F: Statement of Relationship Between Proposal and an Existing HPRC-Approved Project (TD4), if necessary
- TCPS Tutorial Certificate
- Informed Consent Document
- An electronic copy of the proposal
Dissertation proposals must be approved by the Faculty of Graduate Studies at least six months prior to the defense date.
Proposals written by former students may be consulted, but not borrowed, in the program office.
Dissertation
Carry out research projects and report the results in appropriate Thesis and Dissertation format.
Dissertations written by former students may be consulted, but not removed from the Common Room (2101 Vari Hall).
The Oral Examination
Students must pass an oral examination on the subject of the dissertation and related questions. When the dissertation is judged examinable by the supervisory committee, a dissertation defense must be set up by the supervisory committee. At least 25 business days prior to the oral exam date, all paperwork for the defense must be deposited in the program office. The paperwork includes:
- A “recommendation for oral examination” form signed by your committee members, or with e-mails attached confirming that your dissertation is defendable. The form must also include the title of your dissertation, the confirmed date and time of the defense, as well as the names of all examining committee members. Once deposited in the graduate program office, students will be unable to change the title of their dissertation. The examining committee consists of:
- The Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies or her/his representative, who will be at arm’s length from the supervision of the dissertation, and who will serve as Chair of the examining committee; One external examiner, from outside York University, at arm’s length from the dissertation; One graduate faculty member at arm’s length from the dissertation, and normally from outside the program; Two graduate faculty members from the supervisory committee, or one member from the supervisory committee and one graduate faculty member from the program.
- An electronic copy of the dissertation, without the acknowledgment section. An e-copy of the dissertation will be distributed by the program office to the arm’s length examiner, the external examiner, and the dean’s representative. The student is responsible for providing each of their supervisory committee members with a hard copy.
- External examiner’s pre-approval form (.pdf); this form is required if the external examiner’s incurred expenses will exceed $350; prior approval from the Faculty of Graduate Studies is required before an invitation can be extended to the external examiner.
- Apply to graduate through the FGS website.
There are important deadlines to be observed if you intend to graduate in February, June or October. THEY WILL NOT BE WAIVED.
After the Dissertation Defence
The dissertation oral examination requirement is met if one of the following situations exists:
- if the committee accepts the dissertation with no revisions; or
- if the committee accepts the dissertation with specific revisions
If revisions are required, these must be completed and approved by both the supervisor and the chair of the examining committee. Once approved, your supervisor and the chair must fill out a “revisions approved memorandum” form confirming that the revisions have been completed, or they may each send an e-mail to the Thesis Coordinator confirming the same.
Once the Thesis Coordinator has received confirmation of your approved revisions, she’ll send you an invitation to complete an Electronic Thesis record and upload your dissertation as a PDF along with any supplementary files you may have. Be sure that you have followed the proper dissertation formatting guidelines prior to uploading your document. The Thesis Coordinator will review, approve or return your document(s) if there are any problems (e.g. formatting). Please note that it takes twenty-four hours from the time in which the Thesis Coordinator sends you an invitation for you to be able to access the portal to upload your Thesis.
When the Thesis Coordinator has confirmed that they’ve approved your submission, they’ll send confirmation of this to the graduate program office. The date on which the Thesis Coordinator confirms approval of your document is the date on which your PhD is officially completed. Students must remain registered in the program until this confirmation is received.
The graduate program office will then process your name for convocation.
Approximately two months prior to the convocation ceremony, you should visit the convocation website and RSVP for the ceremony. Their website will also inform you about all facets of convocation.
Upon conferral of your degree, your dissertation will be deposited in the Institutional Repository (YorkSpace) and will be available for harvest by Library and Archives Canada.
Language and Cognate Requirement
Depending on the candidate’s qualifications and intended research demonstrated competency in a foreign language and/or demonstrated competency in a technical skill, such as statistics, may be required at the discretion of a student’s supervisory committee.
Doctoral Timeline
This planning tool is meant to represent the major degree requirements with some suggested timelines for their completion within a 5-year timeframe. Student circumstances vary. Please take that into account when working with this planning guide.
- Coursework (equivalent of 8 half courses including):
- SOCI 6001 3.0: Doctoral Seminar I
- SOCI 6002 3.0: Doctoral Seminar II (2nd year winter term)
- SOCI XXXX: Methods (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Methods (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Theory (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Theory (student’s choice)—in SOCI
- SOCI XXXX: Elective
- SOCI XXXX: Elective
PhD students are permitted to take up to one full course (as electives) in another graduate program at York.
- Comprehensive exam (must be completed by end of PhD2)
- PhD Proposal + Candidacy Exam (must be completed by end of PhD3)
- Research Ethics Approval (for original empirical research involving human participants)
- Dissertation and Defence
| Fall Year 1–Coursework • PhD Seminar 1 • Insert course selections | Winter Year 1–Coursework • Insert course selections | Summer Year 1–Coursework • Insert course selections |
| Fall Year 2–Coursework/comp • Insert course selections • Establishment of comp committee | Winter Year 2–Comp • PhD Seminar 2 • Comp might be completed • PhD Supervisor MUST be identified and paperwork submitted to the Grad Program Office Coursework Completed | Summer Year 2–Comp • Comp is completed Comprehensive Exam Completed (comp must be completed by end of PhD2) |
| Fall Year 3–Dissertation Proposal • Full supervisory committee must be identified and paperwork submitted to the Grad Program Office • Dissertation proposal and ethics begin Full Doctoral Supervisory Committee Submitted and Approved | Winter Year 3–Dissertation Proposal and Research Ethics • Dissertation proposal and ethics continue • Possible candidacy exam | Summer Year 3–Candidacy Exam • Candidacy exam Dissertation Proposal, Ethics and Candidacy Exam Completed (dissertation proposal, ethics and candidacy exam must be completed by end of PhD3) |
| Fall Year 4–Dissertation Research • Data collection and analysis | Winter Year 4–Dissertation Research • Data collection, analysis and chapter writing | Summer Year 4–Dissertation Research • Analysis, chapter writing, revisions |
| Fall Year 5–Dissertation Research • Analysis, chapter writing, revisions | Winter Year 5–Dissertation Research • Final revisions • Doctoral defence | Summer Year 5–Dissertation Research • Final revisions • Doctoral defence |
Doctoral Seminar
This requirement is met by completing SOCI 6001 3.0: Doctoral Seminar I: Professional Development Workshop Series in the first year and SOCI 6002 3.0: Doctoral Seminar II: Professional Development Workshop Series in the second year. The overall objectives of these workshop-based courses are: (i) the development of professional skills for the academic and non-academic labor market; (ii) to facilitate timely progress through the program; and (iii) to contribute to the development of a research culture in the cohort and beyond.
Course Requirements
Four full courses, or equivalent, chosen from those offered at the 6000 level and including both Doctoral Seminars I and II.
Within these four full courses or the equivalent, students are required to complete a full course in theory and a full course in methods.
Courses which meet the theory requirement are: 6130; 6132; 6135; 6160; 6170; 6180; 6190; 6192; 6195; 6196; 6200, 6201; 6204; 6810; 6894.
Courses that meet the methods requirement are 6060; 6086; 6090; 6095; 6096; 6112; 6120; 6121; and 6150.
The program is only able to offer a select number of theory and methods courses during any academic year. As a result, not all of the courses that meet the theory and methods requirements will be available for you to enroll in.
All courses are chosen from those offered at the 6000 level. With the Director’s permission, students may take the equivalent of one full reading course (Sociology 6900) and/or the equivalent of one full course in another graduate program.
Supervisory Committee
At the core of a student’s program is the formation of a three–person graduate faculty supervisory committee. This committee is a way to establish and maintain close contact with faculty members who share similar orientations and interests. While the committee is particularly important when working on the dissertation, if it is in place early enough, the members can also act as academic advisors. Within the general parameters of program requirements, the supervisory committee is largely responsible for advising students on a course of study appropriate to their interests, assessing their work and progress, and for professional mentoring.
The specific composition of the supervisory committee is in the student’s own hands, subject to the Director’s approval and general Faculty of Graduate Studies regulations which specify the categories of membership that must be filled. Briefly stated:
The PhD supervisory committee MUST consist of a minimum of three members from the Faculty of Graduate Studies, at least two of whom must be from sociology. The principal supervisor must be from sociology. In exceptional circumstances, the third, or an additional, member who does not have an appointment to the Faculty of Graduate Studies may be included, but this requires prior approval by the Dean.
PhD students must have a supervisor in place no later than their fifth term of study. Doctoral supervisory committees must be formed no later than the student’s seventh term of study. Students who do not meet these deadlines will be unable to register. It Is essential that a full supervisory committee be in place by the seventh term of study in order to begin the candidacy exam.
Students must submit a completed supervisor and supervisory committee approval form to the program office in order for their supervisor and supervisory committee to be formally approved.
Comprehensive Requirement
In addition to coursework, students must demonstrate comprehensive knowledge in a program-approved area and must have a passed comprehensive exam on file before proceeding to the candidacy exam.
Goals
The comprehensive exam is a distinct degree requirement. It is not part of coursework; nor is it specialized preparation for the dissertation. Through the comprehensive exam, students are given an opportunity to read in an area of sociological inquiry (broadly conceived) and demonstrate their understanding of the area, as a whole, in writing and orally. The exercise gives students an opportunity to develop an appreciation of the intellectual contours of an area of sociological inquiry in ways that contribute to their overall scholarly development as well as their future research and teaching activities.
The area chosen for the comprehensive exam must be distinct from the dissertation research area; that is the comprehensive exam and reading list cannot focus on the student’s dissertation research topic.
The Program orients to the comprehensive requirement as a competency exam. Through the comprehensive take-home exam, students should be able to demonstrate that they understand and can critically reflect on relevant theoretical and methodological perspectives and substantive research contributions that define a given area of inquiry. They should be able to understand and critically reflect on key arguments, debates, research trajectories, gaps in knowledge, and new directions for research that are associated with the comprehensive area.
Comprehensive Examination Committee
The comprehensive examination committee guides students through the comprehensive exam process and evaluates students’ comprehensive exams. Committee members are expected to provide timely feedback on students’ reading lists, rationale, and preparatory exam questions.
The comprehensive examination committee must consist of three faculty members from York University who hold graduate program appointments. The supervisor of the comprehensive examination committee and at least one other member must be appointed to the Graduate Program in Sociology. One of these members must declare themselves an expert in the comprehensive area being examined. One member of the comprehensive examination committee may come from another York graduate program. While it is not a requirement, the Program encourages overlap between the membership of a student’s Dissertation Supervisory Committee and their comprehensive examination committee.
Students are responsible for inviting faculty members to serve on their comprehensive examination committee but should seek the advice of their dissertation supervisor and/or Graduate Program Director before doing so. They should also consult the Program’s list of available faculty to identify suitable faculty with expertise in the comprehensive area being examined.
It is generally expected that faculty members accept student invitations to participate on comprehensive examination committees as supervisors or members in comprehensive areas for which they have expertise. However, it would be unusual for a faculty member to participate in more than two comprehensive examination committees in any full academic year.
Structure and Format
Students must complete their comprehensive exam in one of the areas defined and approved by the Program:
- Bodies, Genders, Sexualities
- Cultural Sociology
- Global Sociology
- Health Studies
- Migration Studies
- Political Sociology and Social Movements
- Qualitative Methods
- Race, Racialization and Racism
- Social Theory
- Socio-Legal Studies, Criminalization, Justice
- Work, Labour, and the Economy
Before writing the exam, students should work closely with their comprehensive examination committee to: (1) develop a reading list; (2) write a rationale for the comprehensive exam; and (3) identify three preparatory exam questions. The reading list, rationale, exam questions, and the One-Comp Pre-Approval Form must be submitted to the Graduate Program Office by the deadline established by the Program Office. Students may not begin their comp until these documents have been received and approved by the Program Office.
The format is a take-home exam written over the course of seven days followed by an oral discussion of the exam which should normally take place within two weeks of submitting the exam. The student must write answers (3,000-4,000 words each) to two of the preparatory exam questions chosen by the comprehensive examination committee. The oral discussion should begin with a short presentation by the student followed by questions and answers posed by members of the comprehensive examination committee. The oral discussion is normally two hours in length.
Reading lists, Rationale, and Take-Home Exam Questions
Reading Lists
Students are required to use the Program-approved comp reading lists but have the option of adding readings to their final list that are not included on the Program-approved list. These supplemental readings may comprise up to 25% of a student’s final comprehensive exam reading list. Normally, an approved final comprehensive reading list should include references that total the equivalent of 25 medium-sized books (5 journal articles = 1 book).
The final reading list must be approved by the comprehensive examination committee. The final reading list must also be approved by the Program’s Curriculum Committee. Approval by the Curriculum Committee can only be withheld when the Program-approved guidelines for the composition of reading lists have not been followed. Normally, approval is a matter of ensuring that the number of readings does not fall below the minimum or exceed the maximum, that the requisite number of required readings has been included, and that no more than the allowed number of supplemental readings has been included.
- Bodies, Genders, Sexualities Reading List (.pdf)
- Cultural Sociology Reading List (.pdf)
- Global Sociology Reading List (.pdf)
- Health Studies Reading List (.pdf)
- Migration Studies Reading List (.pdf)
- Political Sociology and Social Movements Reading List (.pdf)
- Qualitative Methods Reading List (.pdf)
- Race, Racialization and Racism Reading List (.pdf)
- Social Theory Reading List (.pdf)
- Socio-Legal Studies, Criminalization, Justice Reading List (.pdf)
- Work, Labour and the Economy Reading List (.pdf)
Rationale
The rationale is a short document (500 words maximum) that explains the learning objectives for the comprehensive exam and that justifies the selection of supplementary readings.
Exam Questions
Exam questions should ask students to critically reflect on key debates, arguments, and research trajectories in the comprehensive area and provide students an opportunity to demonstrate their overall knowledge of the area. To ensure that the exam meets breadth requirements, students and committees are strongly encouraged to include at least one of the following questions among the three preparatory exam questions. However, students should feel free to take all three take-home exam questions from this list.
- What are the key arguments made by scholars working in the area? How do they relate with one another and what is your critical assessment of them?
- What is the intellectual context/climate of the area? How has that context/climate changed? What factors have influenced that change and with what impact on the relevant scholarship?
- How have key debates in the area been shaped by specific theoretical or methodological perspectives?
- How do you position yourself in the key areas of debate within the area and why?
- What are the current methodological/theoretical/or substantive research gaps in the area and what are their implications for scholarship in the area?
Timing and Scheduling
Students must complete the comprehensive exam before taking the candidacy exam. The comprehensive exam is normally begun at the beginning of year two (term four) and must be completed no later than term six.
Students can write the take-home comprehensive exam during three time slots each year.
| Fall | Winter | Summer | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Term Start Date | Sept. 1 | Jan. 1 | May 1 |
| Last date to submit the reading list, rationale, 3 exam questions, and the comp pre-approval form to the Program Office | Sept. 15 | Jan. 15 | May 15 |
| Last date for take-home exam questions to be received by the student | Nov. 29 | Mar. 29 | July 29 |
| Last date to submit written answers (based on 7 days to write) | Dec. 6 | Apr. 5 | Aug. 5 |
| Last date for oral and adjudication | Dec. 19 | Apr. 19 | Aug. 19 |
To ensure timely completion of the comprehensive exam, students are encouraged to begin planning and preparing for their first comp well before Program deadlines. For example, students should begin establishing their comprehensive examination committees and identifying their first comp area two months prior to the completion of their final course.
Evaluation and Outcomes
The comprehensive examination committee is responsible for evaluating the student’s work. Following the completion of the oral discussion, committee members will vote to pass or fail. To pass, students must demonstrate competence in their written responses to the two exam questions and in the oral discussion of the exam. Competence is generally demonstrated by a thorough understanding of key arguments, debates, and research trajectories of the area and their relationship with one another, as well as insightful and critical reflections on the area covering such issues as shifts in research trajectories and their sources, new directions for inquiry, and gaps in the literature.
A student will pass the exam when two or more members vote to pass the exam. The student will fail when two or more members vote to fail the exam. A written rationale for the final assessment must be prepared by the chair of the comprehensive examination committee. The assessment must be written in a manner that will allow students to understand the decision. In cases when a student has failed the comprehensive exam, the committee’s rationale for the final assessment must discuss the weaknesses in the exam as well as the required areas for improvement. The chair of the comprehensive examination committee is responsible for submitting the final assessment and the formal outcome of the exam to the Graduate Program Director and the Program Office no later than one week following the oral discussion of the written exam.
A student who fails the comprehensive exam on their first attempt can appeal the failed exam decision once. Should the student be given the opportunity to rewrite the exam, they will be re-evaluated on the basis of a new written exam and oral discussion of the exam. Normally, the re-examination will be based on the two exam questions initially proposed and include the same comprehensive examination committee. Scheduling for the re-evaluation is flexible but the re-evaluation should take place before or, at the latest, by the next scheduled exam date. Should the student fail the re-examination, they must withdraw from the Program.
After successfully completing the comprehensive exam, students must submit the following to the Graduate Program Office: (i) One-Comp Exam Approval Form; (ii) an electronic copy of the comprehensive exam.
Appeals
If a student fails their comprehensive exam on the first attempt, they can appeal the failed exam decision once. They can do so on the basis that, in their view, the written decision by the committee does not justify the exam outcome. To appeal an exam failure, students must submit a One-Comp Exam Appeals Form to the Program Office within two weeks of the decision being rendered. They must demonstrate how their responses to the comprehensive exam questions successfully meet the criteria of assessment. The Appeal Form provides the comprehensive examination committee an opportunity to respond in writing to the student’s appeal. The comprehensive exam and the Comprehensive Exam Appeal Form are submitted to the Program’s awards and appeals committee. The awards and appeals committee can either affirm the decision of the comprehensive examination committee or grant a rewrite.
Accessibility and Accommodations
Students requiring accommodations must contact the appropriate accessibility office at the university well in advance of the comprehensive exam deadlines. Any adaptation of the format or schedule of the comprehensive exam must first be discussed with and approved by Student Accessibility Services, the comprehensive examining committee and the Program Office well before the start of the comprehensive.
Dissertation Proposal and Candidacy Exam
Students must develop an acceptable dissertation proposal as part of the candidacy exam which has both a written and oral component.
Goals
The candidacy exam provides students an opportunity to read widely in the area of inquiry that is the focus of their dissertation, to situate their dissertation research within relevant literatures, and to develop and defend a detailed dissertation research proposal. Through the candidacy exam students must demonstrate that they have: 1) acquired the requisite methodological and theoretical skills to successfully complete dissertation-level research; 2) a command of the relevant literature within which their proposed research is situated; and 3) proposed an intellectually original, logistically feasible, and ethically sound dissertation research project.
Candidacy Committee
Students are guided through the candidacy exam process by their PhD supervisory committee.
Structure and Format
The candidacy exam has a written and oral component. The written component is the dissertation proposal which normally should be approximately 10,000 words (40 pages) in length. The oral component is the proposal defence, which should be approximately two hours in duration.
The dissertation proposal
The dissertation proposal should include a detailed account of the proposed research design including the study objectives, key research question(s), theoretical and methodological approach, extended literature review, research design, ethical issues, and anticipated contributions. The extended literature review should be approximately 5000 words (20 pages) in length. The extended literature review is meant to ensure that the candidate has met the expected breadth requirements for the candidacy exam. A literature review can demonstrate breadth in a variety of ways. For example, it may demonstrate how the dissertation topic or research question relates to different areas of sociological inquiry (e.g. sociology of race and racism, sociology of family, sociology of health). Alternatively, the literature review may establish the interdisciplinary nature of the topic or research question by exploring relevant literature within and beyond established contours of sociological inquiry.
The literature review should be based on a list of readings, developed in consultation with the supervisory committee, that contextualizes the dissertation research within wider areas of sociological and related inquiry. The reading list should be submitted to the supervisory committee and approved prior to the start of proposal writing.
The Proposal Defence
The Candidacy Exam-Proposal Defence Information Form must be submitted to the Program Office 25 business days prior to the proposal defence.
The proposal examination committee consists of the supervisory committee plus one external reader who is at arm’s length from the dissertation. Normally, the external reader is a faculty member appointed to the Graduate Program in Sociology and is a non-expert reader whose role is to strengthen, support, and improve the proposed research through constructive, critical dialogue. Only when a reader from within the Program cannot be identified can an arm’s length reader from another York University Graduate Program be considered. The name of the external reader must be approved by the Graduate Program Director at least 25 business days prior to the proposal defence. To assist in identifying arms’ length readers, the curriculum committee is tasked with maintaining a list of faculty who have agreed to serve in the role.
The proposal defence is chaired by a member of the supervisory committee other than the supervisor. All members of the proposal examination committee must attend the proposal defence either in person or remotely. Immediately prior to the defence, the chair of the proposal examination committee should confirm that all members of the examination committee view the proposal to be examinable and establish a question order and expected duration for the proposal defence. These details should be communicated to the student and any Program members attending the defence.
The defence should begin with a 15– to 20–minute presentation of the proposed research by the student, followed by no more than two rounds of questions about the proposal from the proposal examination committee. Examination committee members should pose questions of the student that help to determine whether the proposed research is: (1) feasible; (2) will lead to a sound dissertation that makes an original contribution to knowledge; and (3) that the student has acquired the appropriate background in the literature and the required methodological and theoretical skills to independently and successfully undertake the research.
The proposal defence is public in the sense that other members of the Program can attend without prior permission. However, only members of the proposal examination committee can pose questions of the student or comment on the proposal unless the student and the examination committee agree otherwise prior to the defence. The Program encourages widespread participation at the defence as a way to promote dialogue among Program members about students’ research.
Timing and Scheduling
Students must complete the comprehensive exam before preparing for the candidacy exam. The candidacy exam is normally begun in year two (5th or 6th term of study) and at the latest is completed by the 9th term of study.
The student’s supervisor is responsible for establishing a date for the oral defence in consultation with the student, the other candidacy committee members, and the external reader and must share the date with the Graduate Program Administrator at least 25 business days prior to the defence. An electronic version of the dissertation proposal should be distributed to all members of the examining committee members by the Graduate Program Administrator at least 20 business days prior to the defence.
Evaluation and Outcome
The proposal examination committee is responsible for assessing the student’s work. The outcome of the candidacy exam is either pass or fail. Following the completion of the proposal defence, committee members will vote to pass or fail. To pass the candidacy exam, the student must demonstrate their readiness to successfully undertake dissertation research both through the proposal itself and their oral presentation and discussion of the proposal.
The proposal examination committee generally includes four faculty members (three-person supervisory committee + external reader). In some instances, it may include five members (four-person supervisory committee + external reader). When examined by a four-person committee, a student will pass when three or more members cast a passing vote. A student will fail when two or more members cast a failed vote. When examined by a five-person committee, a student will pass when three or more members cast a passing vote. A student will fail when three or more members cast a fail vote.
A written rationale of the final assessment must be prepared by the chair of the proposal examination committee. The assessment must be written in a manner that will allow students to understand the decision. In cases when a student has failed the candidacy exam, the committee’s rationale for the final assessment must discuss the weaknesses in the proposal and proposal defence as well as required areas for improvement. The chair of the examination committee is responsible for submitting the final assessment and the formal outcome of the proposal defence to the Graduate Program Director and the Program Office no later than one week following the proposal defence.
A student who fails will be provided one opportunity to revise the proposal and be re-evaluated in a proposal defence. Within two weeks of the initial proposal defence the student and supervisor must identify a proposed timeline for completion of the revised proposal and a tentative proposal defence/re-examination date. At the latest, the re-examination should take place six months following the initial defence, normally with the same examination committee members. Should the student fail the re-examination, they must withdraw from the Program.
After successfully completing the proposal defence, students must submit the following to the Graduate Program Office: Candidacy Exam Approval Form and an electronic copy of the proposal.
Note: Students should time the completion of their ethics requirements to align with the successful completion of their candidacy exam. The approved proposal and ethics documents are submitted simultaneously to the Graduate Program Office.
Appeals
Students can appeal a failed proposal examination decision once. They can do so on the basis that, in their view, the written decision by the committee does not justify the exam outcome. To appeal an exam failure, students must complete a Proposal Defence Appeal Form. They must demonstrate how their proposal and responses to questions during the defence successfully meet the criteria of assessment. The proposal examination committee is provided an opportunity to respond, in writing, to the student’s appeal. The exam, the Proposal Defence Appeal Form, and any written response from the proposal examination committee are submitted to the Program’s awards and appeals committee. The awards and appeals committee can either affirm the decision of the comprehensive examination committee or grant a rewrite (see Appendix 1).
Accessibility and Accommodations
Students requiring accommodations must contact the appropriate accessibility office at the university well in advance of the comprehensive exam deadlines. Any adaptation of the format or scheduling of the comprehensive exam must first be discussed with and approved by Student Accessibility Services, the comprehensive examining committee, and the Program Office well before the start of the comprehensive.
Dissertation
Carry out research projects and report the results in appropriate Thesis and Dissertation format.
Students who choose the article-based dissertation option should consult the Graduate Program’s article-based dissertation guidelines.
Dissertations written by former students may be consulted, but not removed from the Common Room (2101 Vari Hall).
The Oral Examination
Students must pass an oral examination on the subject of the dissertation and related questions. When the dissertation is judged examinable by the supervisory committee, a dissertation defense must be set up by the supervisory committee. At least 25 business days prior to the oral exam date, all paperwork for the defense must be deposited in the program office. The paperwork includes:
- A “recommendation for oral examination” form signed by your committee members, or with e-mails attached confirming that your dissertation is defendable. The form must also include the title of your dissertation, the confirmed date and time of the defense, as well as the names of all examining committee members. Once deposited in the graduate program office, students will be unable to change the title of their dissertation. The examining committee consists of:
- The Dean of the Faculty of Graduate Studies or her/his representative, who will be at arm’s length from the supervision of the dissertation, and who will serve as Chair of the examining committee; One external examiner, from outside York University, at arm’s length from the dissertation; One graduate faculty member at arm’s length from the dissertation, and normally from outside the program; Two graduate faculty members from the supervisory committee, or one member from the supervisory committee and one graduate faculty member from the program.
- An electronic copy of the dissertation, without the acknowledgment section. An e-copy of the dissertation will be distributed by the program office to the arm’s length examiner, the external examiner, and the dean’s representative. The student is responsible for providing each of their supervisory committee members with a hard copy.
- External examiner’s pre-approval form; this form is required if the external examiner’s incurred expenses will exceed $350; prior approval from the Faculty of Graduate Studies is required before an invitation can be extended to the external examiner.
- Apply to graduate through the FGS website.
There are important deadlines to be observed if you intend to graduate in February, June, or October. THEY WILL NOT BE WAIVED.
After the Dissertation Defence
The dissertation oral examination requirement is met if one of the following situations exists:
- if the committee accepts the dissertation with no revisions; or
- if the committee accepts the dissertation with specific revisions
If revisions are required, these must be completed and approved by both the supervisor and the chair of the examining committee. Once approved, your supervisor and the chair must fill out a “revisions approved memorandum” form confirming that the revisions have been completed, or they may each send an e-mail to the Thesis Coordinator confirming the same.
Once the Thesis Coordinator has received confirmation of your approved revisions, she’ll send you an invitation to complete an Electronic Thesis record and upload your dissertation as a PDF along with any supplementary files you may have. Be sure that you have followed the proper dissertation formatting guidelines prior to uploading your document. The Thesis Coordinator will review, approve or return your document(s) if there are any problems (e.g. formatting). Please note that it takes twenty-four hours from the time in which the Thesis Coordinator sends you an invitation for you to be able to access the portal to upload your Thesis.
When the Thesis Coordinator has confirmed that they’ve approved your submission, they’ll send confirmation of this to the graduate program office. The date on which the Thesis Coordinator confirms approval of your document is the date on which your PhD is officially completed. Students must remain registered in the program until this confirmation is received.
The graduate program office will then process your name for convocation.
Approximately two months prior to the convocation ceremony, you should visit the convocation website and RSVP for the ceremony. Their website will also inform you about all facets of convocation.
Upon conferral of your degree, your dissertation will be deposited in the Institutional Repository (YorkSpace) and will be available for harvest by Library and Archives Canada.
Language and Cognate Requirement
Depending on the candidate’s qualifications and intended research demonstrated competency in a foreign language and/or demonstrated competency in a technical skill, such as statistics, may be required at the discretion of a student’s supervisory committee.
Learn More
The Graduate Program in Sociology at York is an exciting environment to pursue innovative, socially engaging, career-ready education. Contact our Graduate Program Assistant to learn more.