Summary of the Graduate Affairs Committee meeting Feb 28, 2014, 3:30-4:30.

Present: Michael Brudno, Christina Christara, Stephen Cook (Chair),
Ken Jackson, Allan Jepson (Grad Chair), Aida Nematzadeh

Regrets:  Eyal de Lara, Bogdan Simion

The committee discussed the results of committee members polling their
constiuents concerning Allan J's proposal to replace the current PhD
checkpoints with mandatory annual committee meetings (see the minutes
for the February 14 meeting).

The polling results indicate that there is little support for major
changes to the present system of checkpoints.  However some changes
are necessary in order to clarify their purpose and make the
timelines realistic and enforceable.

In particular:

--Checkpoint 1 (Oral presentation of research paper within 3 months
from MSc) seems to be a good idea, but it should be dropped as a
checkpoint.  In particular there is no need to form a supervisory
committee this early.

--Checkpoint 2 (Qualifying Oral Examination)  is a good way to measure
progress of students, provided the criteria are spelled out clearly. 
There was interest in adopting something similar to Steve Easterbrook's
suggested guidelines in his Feb 3 email to the department (see attached).
However the guidelines (including Steve E's) are unrealistically
difficult for students to meet within the current requirement
of 9 months (after MSc), or even the 16 month deadline set by SGS
for forming an supervisory committee  (See below). 

--Checkpoint 3 (Research Proposal).  This is a good test of whether
the student is ready to achieve candidacy (required by SGS within
3 years)

--Checkpoint 4 (Thesis Proposal) This is like a contract stating
sufficient content for the thesis to be approved.

--Checkpoint 5: Departmental Thesis Examination

--Checkpoint 6:  Final SGS Oral Examination

Allan suggests (with committee approval) that the time for the qualifying
oral should be 16 months, which is the time SGS requires formation
of the supervisory committee.    He will draft a weakened version
of Steve E's suggested guidelines for this checkpoint which can be
realistically met.

In general the annual committee meetings mandated by SGS should be
strictly enforced.  These meetings can be used to decide whether
the student has met certain checkpoints -- it is quite possible that
the student can pass more than one checkpoint in a given meeting.