PhD Guidelines

What follows on this page are our updated guidelines as of March 2024. Some students who are partway through the QE/TP process may find it most suitable to follow the earlier version. The main difference between the two versions is the schedule for the QE and the length of the thesis proposal (the new guidelines require a shorter proposal). Students or supervisors unsure which to choose may consult the Graduate Assistant at custgrad@queensu.ca. 

A completed PhD consists of coursework, qualifying exams and thesis/project proposal approval, independent research and analysis, and an oral defense. PhD research in Cultural Studies should be based on a deliberate choice of method(s), theoretical framework(s), and audience(s), and may be presented in a “traditional” monograph-style format, or in a portfolio format.

Queen’s University is only able to fund PhD students for four years; hence, the following guidelines offer a plan for completing the PhD in that time. We recognize that it is difficult to complete a PhD in four years. Family circumstances, methodological demands, employment responsibilities, and other factors may pose challenges. Given those realities, supervisors are earnestly entreated to help their students pick a manageable scope for their work. And students and supervisors should regularly consult the timeline stated here, in order to ensure that funding does not run out before PhD work is complete. Part-time students or those who start out of phase, and their supervisors, should feel free to contact the Graduate Assistant or a Director for assistance in adjusting this timeline to their circumstances. 

Students should consult with their supervisor(s) about course selection. All doctoral students are expected to take CUST 902 (Cultural Studies Colloquium) and 4 one-term (3.0 unit) graduate courses in Year 1, including CUST 803 and at least one other CUST course. Other courses may be within CUST or selected from graduate courses taught in various units across the university. It is our hope that some courses and assignments will serve to broaden students’ knowledge, while others will lead in a more focused way towards the Qualifying Exam and thesis/project work.

*Doctoral students with a Queen's MA in Cultural Studies need only take two one-term courses, plus CUST 902.

In April, Year 1 students gather at the Thesis Springboard event and present to each other a reflection on what they initially proposed to do for the PhD and how coursework or other factors may have shifted or deepened those plans; shortly following this they meet with their supervisor to update/discuss the PhD project and process. 

Following this event, they use Form X (Thesis Map) to sketch their current understanding of their PhD project, via no more than a 150 words each on Research Questions, Methodology, Theory, Materials, Format (including provisional list of proposed elements or chapters), and Initial Ideas for QE Priorities. The goal is to update the nature of the project, and to identify and distinguish between areas of strength and areas needing attention via the QE. Insofar as you are not able to fill out all text boxes fully, this is useful information for designing the QE exam and should not constitute a reason for delay. Similarly, if you do not have a complete committee, this form is a tool rather than a problem as it will help your supervisor identify suitable colleagues to support the work. 

These two components, the Thesis Springboard and Form X, constitute the hinge between coursework and the Qualifying Exam.

Committee Basics
30 April Year 1: Confirm supervisor(s)

30 July Year 1: Confirm committee via
PhD Form A
If changes desired later, resubmit
PhD Form A

In April of Year 1, through the "Thesis Springboard" process, all students revisit the PhD thesis or project they proposed upon application, confirming or altering it as appropriate. This is also a time to confirm whether their initial supervisor is still the best choice. If a shift in topic or other circumstances warrant and a new supervisor is needed, the student works together with their initial supervisor and/or the Cultural Studies Director to identify a suitable replacement. A student may, with the agreement of the supervisor, seek a co-supervisor.° In consultation with their supervisor(s), and as their work comes into focus through their preparation for the Qualifying Exam, the student then invites two other faculty members to serve on their committee.* Where it is desired for a community advisor to be added to the committee, the student or supervisor should consult with the Director.‡

The Supervisory Committee should be confirmed no later than 30 August of the first year of study by submission of PhD Form A: Constitution of Supervisory Committee. This committee, barring necessary changes, will be in place for the duration of the development of the PhD thesis or project.

°Co-supervisors may be appropriate in situations where faculty members wish to work closely together in a non-hierarchical way, and/or where their roles are clearly defined and complementary. However, degree progress is often smoother with a single supervisor who is responsible for overall direction and timelines, and two committee members who take a secondary role, advising as necessary. 

*One member of the supervisory committee can be unaffiliated with Cultural Studies. That said, if a prospective member wishes to be affiliated, the process is quite straightforward: contact cs.admin@queensu.ca

‡ “Additional examiners” can participate during the development of the work, or join at the time of the PhD Oral Examination. It should be noted that at present only limited funding is available to support such participation, but Cultural Studies is advocating for more support.

QE Basics
Spring Year 1: review PhD goals and complete Form X
Summer Year 1: draft Annotated Bibliography (AB) 
Fall Year 2: augment and revise AB, Form X (if necessary)
End of Fall Term Year 2: write QE

The Qualifying Examination (QE) is designed to ground the thesis/project in relevant communities of theory and practice, and to help the student develop critical perspectives from which to make original contributions. Its focus and scope is individually tailored to the needs of the student in relation to their background and their proposed PhD research.

The QE is not a rough draft of the Thesis/Project Proposal, but rather preparation for it. It is also not a "Comprehensive" exam that asks the student to read a predetermined list or prescribed canon. It is conceived of as an opportunity to fill in gaps or to target areas where deeper knowledge is required.

The flow from courses to the QE and Thesis Proposal defense (which, formally, together comprise the “Comprehensive/Qualifying Exam” as per SGSPA regulations) takes place over a 14-month period, described in the following timeline, with more detail provided through links. This leaves 26 months for researching and writing the thesis within the funding window.

Note that SGSPA guidelines require that “the comprehensive/qualifying examination is to be held within the first two years of registration in the PhD program” and that “students must follow the timeline established by their department/program for this degree requirement” unless a formal accommodation arrangement is in place.

Timeline

 

April Y1
  • Public reflection on PhD project at “Thesis Springboard” event
  • Meeting with supervisor to update/discuss the PhD project and process, elements of Form X
May Y1
  • Form X (Thesis Map) completed online (upon completion it will automatically be available to the supervisor as well as to the Program Assistant)

Insofar as students are not able to fill out this form fully, this is useful information for designing the QE exam and should not constitute a reason for delay. Similarly, if a student does not have a complete committee, this form is a tool rather than a problem as it will help the supervisor identify suitable colleagues to support the work.

June Y1
  • Meeting with supervisor
    • Questions to be discussed at this meeting include:
      • Does the supervisor agree with the student’s identification of areas to be addressed in the exam?
      • What particular materials might the student focus on to fill in gaps in the foundation for their PhD project? 
      • If the committee is not yet fully constituted, who might be suitable, and who will approach them? (Students and supervisors should feel welcome to consult with CUST Directors for ideas if helpful.) 
      • Should the student consult with committee members over the summer?
      • What are the mutual expectations of future meetings during the QE process?
  • Mandatory Workshop: Hows and Whys of the Annotated Bibliography
    • The annotated bibliography is a resource to help with future work. For basic guidance, students might consult this template from Student Academic Success Services or visit the library for additional resources; the expectation for our purpose is an annotation on each work of about 100-300 words in length, including a brief description of the main argument/contribution and some critical review of the work’s utility or effectiveness and relation to other work or the student's project.
  • Reading
    • At this point students should read widely, following multiple leads and strands of possible relevance. But they should keep track of their reading, and keep in mind the aim of narrowing by August to an annotated bibliography of 30-40 items, typically divided into 2-3 areas. 
July Y1
  • Form A (Committee Composition) submitted
  • Reading
  • Consulting with committee members as needed
Aug Y1
  • Form X (revised if necessary) and ca. 30 annotated bibliography items circulated to entire supervisory committee
  • Mandatory QE Symposium
    • PhD1 class meets to share updates on challenges/discoveries in their reading/annotation process
Sept Y2
  • Meeting with supervisory committee to discuss progress & focus, add any final readings
Oct Y2
  • Student suggests 2-3 exam questions to the committee.
  • Student and committee agree upon timing of QE – mainly, the date on which the student will receive the exam questions. 
  • Committee crafts final questions. The committee may edit the questions but should not change them entirely without alerting the student. 
Nov Y2
  • Write QE (10 working days)
    • The student has 10 working days to complete the exam (not including the day the questions are received).
    • The exam is expected to be in the form of 1-2 essays comprising a total of 5000-7000 words. The committee has 10 working days to review the exam after it is submitted. 
Jan-April Y2
  • Meeting with supervisor to debrief QE, discuss next steps
  • Writing Thesis Proposal
    • The thesis proposal should build on the QE to update and elaborate the elements of Form X (Research Questions, Methodology, Theory, Materials, Format). Length should be in the range of 20 pages (6000 words) not including chapter outline, notes, Works Cited, timeline, and samples/prototypes of RC/portfolio elements if deemed necessary. It is understood that the chapter outline is provisional depending on actual research findings. 
  • Ethics clearance (GREB) initiated if required
April Y2
  • Thesis Proposal submitted
May Y2
  • Thesis Proposal defended

 

**students may accelerate this process if supervisor agrees or proposes so. 

**part-time students or students who start out of phase, and their supervisors, should consult the Program Assistant or a Director to confirm adjustments to this timeline.

 

Proposal Basics
ca. 6000 words or 20 pages double spaced 
+ Works Cited, Timeline, Chapter/component listing
+ (if necessary) samples/prototypes of RC/portfolio elements, documentation plan, budget, & GREB
Defended before committee by 31 May, Year 2
 
Following the Qualifying Exam, the student turns their attention to the thesis/project proposal. In development if not necessarily in form, the proposal should update and elaborate the elements of Form X (Research Questions, Methodology, Theory, Materials, Format). The proposal should articulate the specific contribution or intervention the student is prepared to make to established or ongoing work in the field(s); that said, it is understood that the argument and chapter outline may shift depending on research findings. Students may include material from their QE exam in their thesis/project proposal as appropriate.

Students whose work will involve community collaborators must show that they have identified and communicated with appropriate participants, and they must justify their choice of participants given the theoretical, political, methodological, and practical contexts of their thesis or project. Research Creation students will describe how they conceive the relationship between the project and the written component. In consultation with the supervisory committee, a Research Creation dissertation proposal may integrate artistic production. If it does, the ratio between production and the written component will be discussed and determined by the committee and the length of the written component will be adjusted accordingly: that is, the production component is not to be considered over and above the written component. Students planning a Portfolio PhD will explain the rationale for this format.

*Please note that GREB (Ethics) approval can take months. Well before the proposal defense, students who are planning to conduct interviews or work in any way with individuals or communities should do the initial CORE training online and consult with their supervisor and possibly the Unit REB about the appropriate timing for full GREB application.

*Students whose work includes community-based activity, performance art, etc., must indicate in their proposal how this work will be documented.

As the thesis or project proposal is approaching completion, the Supervisor schedules the proposal defense and finds a Chair for it by filling out PhD Form D. At least ten working days prior to the scheduled proposal defense, the student distributes the proposal to all committee members and the Chair. The proposal defense focuses on the relevant theoretical, methodological and substantive areas germane to the student's program. The committee assesses the student's understanding of the discipline, the viability, scope and coherence of the proposal, and the preparedness of the candidate to undertake the proposed thesis or project, and offers suggestions for refinements or changes as appropriate.

Also at the proposal defense, committee members assess the timeline and (if applicable) budget, and each committee member clarifies what they understand their consultative role to be going forward. Some discussion of plans for the student to share their work in progress (at conferences, exhibitions, etc.) is also appropriate at this time. The examination outcome is determined by majority vote, reported by the Chair via PhD Form E. In cases where the committee wishes to pass the proposal but requires a few clearly-defined changes (“Pass with Committee Directives”), the changes are documented by the Chair and effectively become part of the proposal; no re-examination is required. In cases where the committee wishes to evaluate a new version of the proposal (“Revise and Resubmit”), the basic components of the expected revision are summarized by the supervisor and emailed to the student and the Cultural Studies office within three working days. The student has one opportunity to re-write the proposal and defend the revision within two months of the first proposal examination meeting. The defense of a revised proposal can only result in a “Pass” or a “Fail.” If the student does not defend the revision within that time period, or if the outcome of the revised proposal defense is “Fail,” the committee initiates the process of recommending withdrawal on academic grounds. Such a recommendation may be appealed by the student (see SGSPA General Regulations).

Upon successful completion of the Qualifying Exam and Proposal Defense, the program administrator prepares and submits a request to the School of Graduate Studies to add the “Comprehensive Examination Completed” notation as an Academic Milestone on the student’s transcript. 

The supervisor and committee are responsible for guiding the student on matters of scope, methodology, originality, and structure. Students are encouraged to look at other PhD dissertations and projects done in the program for an general sense of the scale, organization, and ambition expected. The evaluation and format of the final product of the PhD are governed by the School of Graduate Studies. More details on doctoral degree completion on SGSPA website.

It is up to each committee member to decide the nature of their involvement with the thesis/project. Roles of committee members are generally discussed and clarified at the proposal defense. A committee member might, for example, offer guidance on drafts of components of the project related to their expertise, and leave feedback on other components to others. It is general practice for the entire supervisory committee to be given an opportunity to read/view and “sign off on” the entire penultimate draft of the thesis/project a minimum of twelve weeks before the anticipated defense date (this timing should allow for feedback and resulting revisions before the work is submitted – as required – 25 working days before the defense date: View details on SGSPA doctoral oral thesis examinations.

As PhD work nears completion, the supervisor should (in consultation with the student) identify and invite two examiners to join the Oral Examination who have not been involved in the work’s development: one from within Queen’s (they may be CUST-affiliated or not) and one from outside Queen’s (the “external examiner,” an expert in the area from another institution). All examiners other than the Supervisor must be “arms’ length”; for definition of that see oral thesis exam form. If you are not sure how to complete this form, please refer to our Guide or contact custgrad@queensu.ca with questions. The examination is typically three hours long, and may result in

  • pass (which may include minor revisions to be made following the defense),
  • referral (major revisions required, possibly followed by a second examination), or
  • failure (only possible if the thesis was already referred) (View SGSPA academic calendar general regulations page).

Following a successful examination, students must continue to pay tuition until an electronic copy of the thesis, in PDF format revised as requested by the Thesis Examining Committee and finally approved by the supervisor, is submitted to the School of Graduate Studies through the E-Thesis Submission process in QSpace, Queen's Research Repository.

We urge all students to return for Convocation to be congratulated by the Admin Team and your colleagues and committee. Intellectually and emotionally, the PhD is an enormous challenge; it is therefore a tremendous achievement. We are proud of each and every one of our graduates.

The following table offers an overview of the stages of the PhD. 

 

Year Fall Winter Spring/Summer
Year One

Two courses + CUST 902


Apply for external funding

Two courses + CUST 902


​Begin thinking about focus of Qualifying Exam.

By 30 April: review and reflect upon project as proposed upon admission via Form X and Thesis Springboard event, meet with supervisor, confirm that current supervisor is best match

By 30 May: meet with supervisor to discuss goals/timeline for QE, start building Annotated Bibliography (AB)

By 30 June: submit annual report to SGS, attend QE workshop

By 30 July: submit Form A (committee composition)

By 30 August: submit Form X (revised as necessary) and draft AB to entire committee, participate in QE Symposium

Year Two

Apply for external funding if needed


By 30 September: meet with committee to discuss QE work so far and share draft exam questions 


By 30 October: submit proposed questions and final AB to committee. After submission the committee has 10 working days to formulate exam question/s.

By 30 November: Begin QE. The exam is written over 10 working days. 

Prepare for GREB if applicable (it is necessary to start this process – i.e., do the Core training, consult with classmates and faculty, etc. – before the proposal defense)

January-March: write PhD proposal, share at least one draft with supervisor and/or committee

By 30 April: submit PhD proposal 

By 30 May: defend PhD Proposal

 

By 30 June: submit annual report

Complete GREB if applicable

Summer: Begin PhD research

Year Three

Continue PhD work

Apply for external funding if needed

Apply for conferences and seek other ways to share your work

Continue PhD work


Apply for conferences and seek other ways to share your work

Continue PhD work

Year Four

Continue PhD work


Apply for postdocs, jobs

Complete PhD work

Select external examiner

Be sure to allow time for your entire committee to review the penultimate draft of your thesis/project and for your own final round of revisions in response to their comments.

Schedule defense (thesis must be circulated to committee in final form 25 working days before the defense)


Defend your PhD

Make any final required revisions


Submit final thesis/documentation to QSpace

Throughout Stay in touch with your committee
Pursue funding opportunities as available
Attend pertinent events at Queen's
Consult and share work with fellow students
Reach out to potential colleagues, audiences, and supporters via conferences, community events, etc.