Progress Review
Schools/departments are to evaluate and provide an annual program progress report for each doctoral student until the student passes the oral comprehensive examination.
Doctoral student advisors will be responsible for obtaining the following information for each assigned advisee:
- Student’s self-evaluations of his/her academic performance and professional development,
- Student’s grades in all graduate courses during the evaluation period,
- Performance ratings from instructors for all graduate courses during the evaluation period,
- Assessment of the student’s professional development from appropriate school/department faculty. Based on the data collected, each doctoral advisor will meet with each student’s doctoral committee to develop and provide a summary of the student’s strengths and area(s) for improvement. Emphasis should be placed on acknowledging accomplishments and professional growth where appropriate.
Recommendations for improvement should include specific changes expected in the student’s performance or behavior, means of assessing the changes, and the time period by which the change is expected to occur. Improvements or lack of change in areas recommended from prior progress reports should be documented. Signatures of the advisor is required on the progress report.
The progress report will include a clear recommendation to the school director/department chair of the Graduate Program Committee (GPC) of whether the student is to be continued each year without conditions, continued with conditions, or not supported for continuation. If conditions for improvement are stipulated, the student must be informed by the Graduate Program Committee (GPC), in writing, of the conditions and specific changes required to satisfy the conditions. If the school/department does not have a GPC, the report will be submitted directly to the school director or department chair.
The following procedures must be followed prior to submitting a recommendation to discontinue a doctoral student’s program for causes other than poor academic performance:
- The student must be informed of the pattern of behavior or incident(s) that has given rise to concern among the school/department faculty members and that led to the recommendation for program discontinuation. These concerns should be noted in the student's annual progress review.
- The student must be given an opportunity to meet with and address the observed behavior or incident with the school/departments Graduate Program Committee (GPC) or with the student’s doctoral committee for school/departments with no graduate program committee. Following the meeting, the GPC or doctoral committee must either reassert the concerns or withdraw the concerns in writing to the department chair or school director.
If the complaint arises from an unprofessional behavior or other behavioral concerns, the student will be given a clearly defined probationary period during which clear behavioral objectives are provided to either rectify the concerns or change the behavior. Clear means of assessing improvement will be provided.
If the complaint results from an egregious violation of laws or published university or school/department policy, rules or professional ethics, clear documented evidence of the incident(s) must be provided with the recommendation.
Copies of the progress report are to be provided by the GPC or student doctoral committee to the school director or department chair no later than April 15 of each year and copied to the student. A department chair or school director may agree or disagree with the GPC’s or doctoral committee recommendation. If in agreement with the recommendation, the director or chair will approve and submit the progress report to the Dean of the Graduate School and a copy to the college dean by May 1. The student and GPC or doctoral committee will be informed in writing of the approval. If in disagreement with the GPC’s or doctoral committee’s recommendation, the school director or department chair will invite the student’s program advisor and the GPC chair or doctoral committee members to discuss the disagreement. After the meeting, the GPC chair or student’s doctoral advisor will approve and submit the original progress report recommendation to the Graduate Dean with a copy to the college dean and student.
or
Modify and submit the recommendation to include conditions agreed to by the school director/department chair and GPC or doctoral committee (or add conditions) to the Graduate Dean with a copy to the college dean and student.
or
Change and submit the recommendation as agreed to by the department chair/school director and GPC or doctoral committee with explanation any additional documentation and signed acknowledgement from the department chair/school director and GPC chair or doctoral committee members. The advisor and GPC members or doctoral committee members may submit additional comments or documentation to support the GPC chair’s decision or to express opposition to the chair’s decision. The changed recommendation will then be submitted to the Dean of the Graduate School with a copy to the college dean and student.