M.A. Exams

M.A. Qualifying Evaluation

The M.A. Qualifying Evaluation occurs in a student’s fourth semester. M.A. students must schedule their M.A. Qualifying Orals with the Graduate Program Coordinator (GPC) by the beginning of the spring semester of their exam, after coordinating the schedules of their committee. After meeting with their advisor, the DGS, and GPC, the student should begin selecting the members of their committee by the end of their third semester. It is the student’s responsibility to coordinate the availability of the committee members, and to reserve an appropriate room with the GPC. If an in-person exam is not possible, the student, or their committee Chair, should create a Zoom room for the event and share it with the committee. 

The M.A. Phase Qualifying evaluation is a three-step process: the constitution of the committee; the development of the portfolio (shared with your committee); and the oral evaluation. Please refer below to the timeline.

Timeline:

  • 4 weeks prior to the Oral Evaluation: M.A. candidate turns in complete portfolio to the GPC; GPC shares materials with committee. Candidate finalizes their committee on One Stop.
  • 2 weeks prior to Oral Evaluation: Candidate and committee communicate to the GPC the work they have selected for the candidate’s two presentations, and the GPC shares these works with everyone

Please note: If at any point in the aforementioned timeline the committee identifies any  major obstacles on the part of the student to complete work adequately, the committee  may choose to readjust the projected timeline for the student. The committee will  accordingly communicate these obstacles to the student; failure to address any gaps in  research, reading, revising, or the level of language may have a detrimental outcome to the exam. 

Evaluation:

1. The Portfolio includes (in a single PDF document): 

  • Table of Contents, indicating page numbers for each component of the portfolio
  • Finalized Reading List (equivalent of 25-30 full-length primary works), around one or several topic(s) of interest
    • Lists should be based on the M.A. Short and Long lists or similar canonical material.
    • The list should include at least 5 key works from each of the following areas: Early Modern; 1800-Present; Francophone; Theory/Philosophy, including at least 3 works from each of the following genres: Theater; Poetry; Prose; Film/Other Media.
    • Students begin drafting their reading list in consultation with the DGS, their adviser(s), and committee members towards the end of their second semester. They should focus on making significant progress on this reading during their first summer in the program.
    • The student should then draft a reading list in consultation with all of their committee  members, along with the rest of the FRIT faculty. The intention behind the reading list is twofold: (1) offer supplementary readings that can help the student revise the seminar papers (or write the thesis) that they will feature in their M.A. portfolio, and (2) expose the student to canonical French and Francophone works. 
    • When constructing the reading list, the student first looks over the M.A. lists (short and long versions) and highlights works that they have already read (recently in  coursework or even a while ago). They should then share this with committee members . Ideally, the student should meet with  every tenure stream faculty member in FRIT if possible in order to get a broader  perspective on the canon and critical theory. Faculty will recommend additional titles  from the MA lists and from the canon, as related to a student's research area of interest. Their suggestions should demonstrate both historical breadth and an attention to  diverse genres and styles. The intent behind the reading list is to tailor it to each  individual student as specifically as possible; the final size, direction, and scope of the  reading list is meant to be collaboratively determined between the advisor, committee, and student. While the exact number of texts on each reading list may vary  according to the difficulty or complexity of the works read, each reading list must  include a substantial list of primary works (literary or historical texts, works of  criticism, theory, or philosophy, or films and other media) in addition to any relevant  secondary criticism. 
    • During the summer in between their first and second year in the program, students  should focus on making significant progress in their reading list. Then, during the  winter break in between their third and fourth semesters in the program, students should finish preparing a finalized reading list as well as complete any major revisions  for their two seminar papers (or thesis). Near the start of their fourth semester in the  program, students will present a finalized reading list to their committee, the DGS, and  the GPC. The Committee may ask for a certain number of précis (summaries) of texts on  the reading list. 
  • Plan A: Thesis or 
  • Plan B: Two seminar papers reworked (minimum 8,000 words, or 32 pages, total; one preferably with the outside member of the advisory committee)
    • Revisions should represent substantial engagement and growth, reflecting a quality equivalent to a professional conference presentation or a graduate journal publication submission.
    • With the approval of the Evaluation Committee, one of the two Plan B papers may be written in conjunction with a course taken outside the Department.
    • At least one of the papers must be written in French.
      It is strongly recommended that at least one Plan B paper be completed by the
    • beginning of the second year.
  • Checklist for M. A. Training. This is an advising tool meant to assist each M. A. student, their adviser(s), and their committee map out the student’s progress in becoming familiar with academic methodologies and professions.
  • Progress Review Report, comprising:
    • The student's yearly reviews by DLI and DGS
    • A short narrative (approx. 1 page) of the student's engagement in scholarship, teaching and professionalization both on and beyond campus (attending talks and workshops; participating in working groups or conferences; submitting publications), which may expand upon the Checklist for M.A. Training.

Please note: For students who select Plan B, the revision should represent substantial engagement and growth; cosmetic changes alone will not earn a passing grade. The quality of the submitted papers should be equivalent to that of a professional conference presentation or a journal publication submission.  

2. The Oral Evaluation

  • The oral evaluation by the committee lasts approximately two hours.
  • The candidate will present two works on their Reading List: one selected by the candidate (in coordination with their adviser), and the other chosen by the committee. The works will be identified by the candidate and the committee chair at least two weeks prior to the oral examination. Each work will be presented for about 10 minutes by the candidate as an explication de texte, with questions from the committee following each presentation. Through this exercise the committee will ascertain that the candidate is familiar with a sufficient number of primary sources, critical sources, and methodological approaches to succeed at the doctoral level. The Proseminar will model such oral presentations.
  • After this part of the oral evaluation, the committee may discuss any component of the portfolio with the candidate.
  • After the oral evaluation, the chair of the committee will provide a summary of the comments made by the faculty and members of the committee.
     

M.A. Qualifying Evaluation Outcome

Students successfully completing the M.A. Qualifying Evaluation will receive one of the following decisions from the M.A. Committee: 

  • Pass with recommendation to continue in the Ph.D. program. 
  • Conditional pass, with additional work to be done as defined by the M.A. Oral Evaluation Committee. 
  • Pass without recommendation to continue in the Ph.D. program. Please note that this outcome may mean that the student will no longer remain within good  standing in the department. 

University Administrative Policy: https://policy.umn.edu/education/masterscompletion 

M.A. Degree Completion Steps

Students must apply to graduate as they near the completion of their M.A. degree, even if they are continuing on to the Ph.D. within the University of Minnesota’s French graduate program. Please check OneStop’s website for updated Degree Completion Steps for your program: Questions about any part of this process may be directed to the Graduate Program Coordinator.


If the student was admitted to the MA degree (instead of directly into the PhD degree program), they will need to apply for the PhD program to continue. This is an administrative formality if the student is in good standing and has communicated to the program that they intend to continue on to the PhD. Please refer questions about the process to the GPC.