ADVICE ON THE MA1 PERSONAL PROJECT / ORAL EXAM

 

 

 
 SUMMARY of DEMANDS

 THIS IS AN ORAL EXAM.  You are expeced to briefly report on a research project, in impeccable English.  Research will have been carried out prior to the exam.  There will not be time at the oral exam to launch into elaborate presentations involving the reading of texts, listening to recordings or viewing video material.

The exam project must be course-related (i.e. seek to correlate communicative constraints and observable linguistic features). Choose an original subject about which you have something to tell.

 Do not do "half of the job", i.e. focus only on communicative constraints or only give a checklist of linguistic features, without meaningfully correlating the two.

 Do not "just do an analysis" : start with a clear working hypothesis ("I would like to show that in this text / texts of this type, ... "),

 discuss the kind and quantity of material (text, audio, video, ...) you have subjected to study;

 discuss the instruments from the "toolkit" chosen for the analysis;

 discuss the research strategy you have adopted; and of course,

 discuss the inferences you have reached on the basis of this research : how do communicative constraints and observable linguistic features correlate meaningfully ?  Be careful not to make any hasty inferences or unsubstantiated claims.

The work must be YOUR OWN.  Do not try to retrieve someone else's analysis from the library or the Internet. Here as elsewhere, plagiarism will be sanctioned.

 Rehearse with a friend to make sure you stay within the 15-MINUTE TIME LIMIT.   Work towards optimal efficiency.

 Make your presentation interesting and fun, for yourself as well as for the examiner(s).

 You will be graded on the quality of your English as well as on the content of your presentation and its relevance to the course.

 Click here to see subjects dealt with in earlier years. 

 Click here to read more precise instructions. 

 Click here for second session instructions
  


 

Unoriginal discussions of advertisements and manuals (e.g. for VHS equipment, telephones or cameras), content analyses of pop songs and descriptions of varied, but unrelated texts have proved to be rather unsuccessful ventures in the past. Martin Luther King's speech "I have a Dream" is a beautiful topic, but has been dealt with too often already.  Discussions of one event in two different newspapers often turn out to be rather stereotyped and unoriginal. Students are encouraged to work with texts in which they have a genuine interest and on which they can contribute an original, interesting discussion.
 
 Students are expected to start with an explicit thesis statement ("I would like to show that in this text / texts of this type, ... ") and to explain one's choice of instruments (e.g. speech act theory). Only then should the text be analysed; all claims should be backed up with genuine evidence (not examples deliberately singled out to suit the student's purpose). This evidence should be substantial and representative enough (remember that "one swallow does not make a summer") and, of course, text-, co-text, context- or intertext- based.
 
 Comparative approaches are welcomed (e.g. how is one and the same event discussed in different media, different tenors, or for different audiences, and how can observable differences be correlated with different demands or expectations, etc. ?). "Critical" approaches are welcome, but should obviously be based on an objective, unbiased analysis.
 
Students must not read aloud a written preparation, whether on paper or on screen. Students who ignore this demand will be heavily sanctioned. The students' ability to express themselves spontaneously and to structure their thought clearly as they proceed is part of the criteria on which they will be assessed. Obviously, the English in which these analyses are to be presented should be elegant as well as grammatically and phonologically impeccable.

Université Libre de Bruxelles, Homepages Membres Corps Académique.