Program Progression

Students will have a committee meeting and submit an annual Graduate Progress Report (GPR) every Fall (except in their first semester, or if their defence date is prior to the due date of the GPR). Please see more about the Graduate Progress Report on the Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies website, including details on how to fill in and submit the report (scroll to the bottom for the Graduate Progress Report). Students who do not complete the GPR risk receiving an unsatisfactory ranking.  

The Department of Archaeology discusses our philosophy behind the Graduate Progress Reports in Appendix B of the Graduate Handbook.

Why do we do GPRs?

The Archaeology Department has always conducted progress reviews because we believe there is significant value in supervisors and students openly discussing student progress, future plans, concerns, and successes. GPRs are now formally required by the University, along with a standardized form and requirements.

How is progress evaluated?

  • Course Grades: This refers to academic performance (GPA) in completed courses, and the completion of all required courses within the departmental timeline. Note that in addition to Theory, Research Design, Directed Readings, and other approved Graduate courses, students must complete two semesters of the Department Seminar (ARCH 872 and 873), their Prospectus and Colloquium, and for PhD students, their Comprehensive Examination. Each of these have department-determined timelines for completion; if any of these courses are not completed on time, the student should not receive an overall ranking of “Very Good”. This is true even if there is there is an approved reason for the delay.
  • Research Progress: Progress made on the thesis research (data collection, analysis, writing, grants, etc.).
  • Scholarly Activity: Publications, conference attendance/participation, presentations, professional development, community engagement, etc.

How is progress be ranked?

  • Very Good: All tasks/courses are up-to-date and completed on time and with excellence.
  • Satisfactory: All tasks/courses are up-to-date and completed on time and completed well.
  • Satisfactory with Concerns: A range of possibilities may trigger this evaluation. These include tasks/courses not being up-to-date and/or completed poorly, if a student must go on leave or change their thesis topic, or if a student’s funding fell through.
  • Unsatisfactory: A student has not progressed, and they have not been on leave and have had no change in research topic. Realistic plans need to be put in place for the student to meet their deadlines and requirements. These will be reevaluated in the February progress review (internal) and then more formally the following September. Note that an evaluation of Unsatisfactory could impact a student’s funding, see Appendix E of the Graduate Handbook.