I find myself with an invitation to be an external reviewer for a department that I take it aspires to climb the Leiterometer. And I'm hearing word from my own department that it's time to update our own program. Fair enough. Questions especially for those freshly out of school:
What would you say is the purpose of comprehensive examinations? Should they track traditional areas, plausible AOSs and AOCs, problems, or historical periods, or something else? Does it still make sense to group certain areas together such that there's one exam in, e.g., "metaphysics, phil mind, logic" and another in, e.g., "epistemology, phil language, phil science"? What about oral examiantions? Should all comps be oral? None?
Please opine freely.