Resources for PhD Students

At the end of their first and second year, students submit their QP plan – a short document consisting of i) a one-paragraph description of their indented QP project/area and ii) a list of 2 or 3 preferred research advisors for the QP. For the second QP plan, the student must also justify how the topic is different from the QP1 topic.

Each QP has a committee consisting of a primary QP advisor and a secondary QP advisor. The advisors must be faculty members in the Department of Linguistics. An external committee member is not required, but students can invite an external member to the committee if they wish. Students are expected to provide input on their preferred QP advisors in their QP plan.

Students are expected to submit a QP plan for each of their QPs by April 15 of the respective academic year (year 1 for QP1, year 2 for QP2).

Before a QP defense, students must submit a proposal to all of their QP committee members. The proposal, 1-2 pages long, outlines the research topic and is composed of research questions, a work plan, and references. This is not the same as the QP plan.

Students are expected to submit a QP proposal for each of their QPs by September 15 of the respective academic year (year 2 for QP1, year 3 for QP2).

By default, QP defenses are closed defenses between the student and their committee.

The first QP defense should be scheduled in advance with your committee members. A QP result form will be completed by your committee members following the defense.

The second QP defense (advancement to candidacy) needs to be scheduled in advance with committee members, and both the department manager and DGS notified, at least 3 weeks in advance of the defense. An exam report form will be completed by your committee members following the defense.

Congratulations! There is nothing left for you to do.

When you pass QP2, the Department Manager will submit the appropriate form to officially advance you to candidacy.

If you receive an outcome of minor revisions, you will have 30 days to make and submit your QP revisions.

Minor revisions must be reviewed and cleared by the primary QP advisor.

If you receive an outcome of major revisions, you will have 90 days to make and submit your QP revisions.

Major revisions must be reviewed and cleared by the entire QP committee.

The typical result of a failed QP is separation from the program. Students may petition their QP committee to rewrite and redefend.

If the student petitions their QP committee for an opportunity to redefend, the petition should be submitted as soon as possible following the failure.

Students should notify the Department Manager and DGS when they've scheduled their QP1 defense. An email to both will suffice.

The second QP is the qualifying exam that advances students to candidacy. This defense needs to be scheduled in advance with your committee members, and both the Department Manager and DGS notified, at least 3 weeks in advance of the defense.

The topic of QP2 must be different from QP1 and it must be in a distinct subfield. For instance, it cannot be the case that both QPs are in formal semantics. We encourage students to discuss possible topics for QP2 with their advisor well in advance of the plan and proposal, so the advisor can detemine the viability of the topic or discuss any unclear cases with the rest of the faculty. If necessary the faculty will make a determination on a case-by-case basis whether a proposed QP2 is sufficiently distinct in terms of topic and subfield from QP1. Students should justify in their QP2 plan how the topic is different from their QP1.

The dissertation, however, can build upon a topic in one of the QPs.

Students share their preferred QP committee members in your QP plan and through continued discussion with your primary advisor. The faculty will not vote to approve your QP committee. It is the student's responsibility to ask faculty to join their QP committees. Note: the process is different for dissertation committees.

There are no fixed expectations for the committee members beyond reading the final draft of the paper and participating in the defense. With that said, it is completely reasonable to request feedback on drafts and request meetings to discuss progress with a committee member, and we encourage students to do so. It is up to the student to make any such requests.

No. Most faculty will continue to be available to their advisees when they are on leave; however, it's important that you maintain consistent communication with your advisor, so when they do go on leave, together you can come up with a plan for how to meet and what level of comunication is acceptable until they return.

It can be difficult to give advance notice for leaves because often times, faculty don't know if their leave is approved until shortly beforehand.

QP1 traditionally must be defended by the end of the Spring semester in the second year.

Students who need an extension may request this from their QP committee; however, requests are subject to review by the committee and can result in approval or denial. Extensions should not be relied on to complete any program requirements.

If the student's QP committee grants an extension request, the Department Manager and DGS must be notified, and the student can continue to work on their QP1 through the Fall semester of their third year.

QP1 must be defended no later than December 15 of the third year. If the QP can't be successfully defended by this deadline, it will result in a failure.

QPs that result in minor or major revisions are provisional passes. The QP isn't complete and doesn't become a pass until the revisions are successfully completed. Minor revisions must be cleared by the QP advisor. Major revisions must be cleared by the entire QP committee.

Minor revisions are only a provisional pass. It's possible to receive minor revisions more than once for the same QP; however, students should maintain frequent check-ins with their QP advisor to ensure minor revisions are on track and reduce the likelihood of further rounds of revisions. If students are not making satisfactory progress towards completion after two rounds of minor revisions, they should meet with their QP advisor to discuss their next steps.

Major revisions are only a provisional pass. If a student doesn't complete their revisions by the 90-day deadline or if those revisions are not satisfactory, the QP result becomes a failure. Students cannot receive major revisions for the same QP more than once. It is possible for students to receive a result of minor revisions following their major revisions submission, for which the student would then have 30 days to complete their minor revisions.

If students fail their QP1 a second time, they will be separated from the program. They will not be able to petition their QP committee to defend a third time.

You advance to candidacy once you've completed QP2.