About the selection M2
“(…) It is very important to my eyes to bring the selection of students for entry into first year of master (for certain sectors and on an experimental basis at the start if necessary). This would enable to offer our students the real training courses in four semesters they need. “
The debate on the selection of students in M1 or M2 is, to me it seems as old as the LMD reform itself. As for me, I am a strong supporter of the selection from the M1 for a pure question of consistency.
Continue to select the input of M2 returns for many masters to defeat an important part of the reform. Whether or not one adheres to the LMD system, since it is a reality, it seems logical to me (especially legitimate) to put fully in place. But as you stop me if I’m wrong, but it is indeed the system “Licence-Master-Doctorate”, not “Licence-Master 1-Master-Doctorate 2” … Also, rename the Master “Master 1” and DEA / DESS “Master 2” still in most cases to work as before is not serious.
Either we do more practice no selection, or it is fixed at the entrance to the first year of master.
Further, as recalled Pr. Truchet, one of the directions of the reform is “to give students real training courses in four semesters.” Or again, keeping the selection M2 does in – a lot of cases – “start” truly the Master in second year, only two small semesters, just as before the reform …
The reasons for maintaining selection in M2, however, remain obvious: if it was enough of a L3 level to pass the entrance examination CRFPA, the support of the NHS and whatnot, resistance to selection from the M1 would probably be lower and it would make much less fuss. The problem is that we do takes not really the way .