this is how we do it
I’ve gotten curious about the exam processes in different departments. It seems like every Rhetoric/Writing/English department handles it differently, even though we all have the same general ideas about the outcome. (Don’t we? I think we do.)
Here, you test in three areas: Rhetorical Theory, Technical Communication Theory, and your subfield. (Mine is Intellectual Property Theory & Law.) I’m responsible for right around 100 works altogether, but my Rhetorical Theory list is longer than some others. You negotiate readings with each examiner, and some of them may also negotiate a question list ahead of time. (Not all of mine have.)
It’s reasonably rare to see someone in the department take more than six months after their coursework to prepare. Most of us who finished in May have either already examined or will before Thanksgiving. Examining quickly is heavily encouraged — not being done by Christmas would be cause for A Meeting With One’s Advisor in most cases. The general sense, I think, is that you should be familiar with the key texts in each area by the end of your coursework, and for the most part that’s true. It’s not uncommon to see someone examine with about ten weeks of prep. Most of us going up now started reading heavily the first week of September.
There are typically (but not always, depending on who you work with) two sets of writtens for each area: a two hour in-house, and a 24 hour take-home. Those of us in my reading group are doing them over about ten days. I’m not sure what’s typical. Then you wait three weeks, per Grad School rules (two for professorial reading, one for the Grad School to process the paperwork.) Then there’s a two hour oral examination with all four of your committee members (three internal, one outside).
And then, assuming you passed, later on there’s the oral defense of your dissertation prospectus.
So that’s what happens here. I know at Syracuse there’s an examination proposal, and at other places exams are entirely written. Fascinating. How does your department do it?
Comments
I'm about to hijack your blog . . .
At my intitution, there are two tracks: Option #1, two subject areas are prescribed and one is chosen by the student; Option #2, the examinee chooses all three subject areas. I choose option #2. I had approximately 100 texts (books and scholarly articles) per subject area, about 300 total. These texts were chosen in coordination with all committee members (but they really didn't add much to what I had already constructed . . . a few of them took texts off the list, God bless 'em).
Although the case at my institution before I sat for exams was to supply questions to the examinee, I wasn't so lucky. I went in blind to the types of questions I would be asked. My committee chair told the *types* of questions certain examiners tended to ask, but that's about all I could count on. I knew nothing about scope or depth of info the question would require.
I took the exams over a five-day period (Mon, Wed, Fri), and I sat for five hours each day, one subject, one day.
Going in to the exams, I thought I wasn't going to make it . . . . it sounded so very overwhelming and much too hard. However, I surprised myself as I got in each day and started to write. While the writing wasn't the best writing I've ever done, it was pretty good and I was able to answer the questions in some significant detail.
I'm hearing these days about an institution that allows students to take exams before their coursework is completed . . . so they are ABD (except for a couple of classes) when they pass.
It's odd how different institutions handle these exams. Thanks for posting the question. I look forward to seeing all the terrific answers. (Sorry for the hijack!)
Posted by: Billie | November 8, 2006 10:01 AM
Thanks! And don’t worry at all about hijacking. The question invites it!
What kind of department are you in, BTW? (If it won't blow your cover.) My impression is that English departments usually require waaaay longer reading lists.
Posted by: Krista | November 8, 2006 10:03 AM
I'm in an English Studies program at Illinois State, concentrating on Technology and Rhetoric. Our written exams (which I just scheduled for the week after Thanksgiving) are taken in 3 parts over 2 weeks. The categories are: Pedagogy, English Studies and Specialization. The process is fairly straightforward. You ask 3 people to advise and work with and eventually write your questions. You write 3 syntheses based on the bibliographies your committee approves. Basically, you're working seperately with these 3 advisors, though I've mentioned several times to all of them how I see each portion working to inform the other. When the final drafts of each synthesis is approved; they are signed and put in a folder. Then each advisor writes an exam question based on their synthesis.
When you take them you take either Pedagogy or English Studies one week. You have four hours for the exam. Then the next week you take the one you didn't take. Once you turn in the second exam answer you pick up your Specialization question, which you have a week to answer.
Once you pass, you defend a diss. perspectus, as well.
Posted by: Devon | November 8, 2006 4:37 PM
I'm in English (rhet/comp), so that may be the longer reading lists. However, others in my dept. had much shorter lists, and some of them even knew the questions beforehand. I say that knowing that the dept went through some MAJOR changes after most of the dept left . . . I believe the dept. is trying to standardize the exams when they weren't standardized really at all before.
What I forgot to add earlier is that once the exams are taken/passed, there is no oral defense of the exams (no second chance to clarify anything). There is then the dissertation and the dissertation defense. It seems those are much more standard and common (the form they take) than the exams ever will be. :-)
Posted by: Billie | November 8, 2006 7:00 PM