Book Navigation Links
Annual Graduate Review
Annual Graduate Student Review
What is the Graduate Review Form?
The Graduate Review Form (GRF) is part of a yearly review process that involves the following six steps: 1) the student prepares a 1-2 page narrative detailing progress, problems, issues, and a CV listing scholarly accomplishments, 2) the student schedules a meeting with their advisor to review these accomplishments and to assess progress towards the degree (53 steps, thesis chapters, proposals for funds, etc.), 3) the advisor fills out the GRF copies for student’s file and GPD, 4) the GPD reviews the GRF, 5) the GRFs are discussed at Faculty Caucus, 6) GPD conveys evaluation to the student, with recommendations.
Who needs to fill out the GRF?
All graduate students need to fill out a Graduate Review Form.
What are the goals of the graduate review process? Every fall, all faculty members are required to fill out an annual faculty report (AFR) of progress and accomplishments. The annual graduate review process is designed to work in the same way, to:
1. Hold student accountable for sustained progress towards degree
2. Hold advisor accountable for sustained mentoring of student
3. Help the student move along steadily through the degree
4. Make sure students know their academic standing
5. Improve communication between student and advisor
6. Build systematic transparency in the evaluation of student progress by involving the Faculty Caucus
How does the graduate review process work?
• Student meets with advisor in the Fall semester, Winter break, or early Spring semester to go over progress (student gives advisor narrative and most recent CV).
• Advisor fills out GRF and gives it to Shelley by January 30th* (date may change per calendar)
• The Graduate Program Director (GPD) reviews GRFs, and sorts them into three preliminary groups: -> In Good Standing (IGS), Need Improvement (NI), and Shows Cause for Concern (SCC).
• Faculty caucus meets in February- March to discuss GRFs in the following order:
1. SCC group
2. NI group
3. IGS group
• Faculty comments and makes recommendations for students in all three groups, but especially the Shows Cause for Concern (SCC) and Need Improvement (NI) groups.
• GPD conveys these recommendations to student and advisor.
• For students in the SCC group, additional input will be sought from the student’s committee, and a meeting scheduled that will include the student, GPD, and student’s advisor (may include other committee members if needed). At this meeting, a plan of action will be discussed to clarify what the student needs to accomplish to move out of the SCC group.
If a student is placed in the Show Cause for Concern Group (SCC) the following actions occur. 1st SCC evaluation (Year 1)-> As above
2nd SCC evaluation (Year 2)-> Student is placed in Tier 4 for TA ranking.
The student is warned about possible dismissal if they remain in the SCC category for a 3rd consecutive year
3rd SCC evaluation (Year 3) -> GPD normally will recommend to the Graduate School that the student be dismissed from the program.
Who will end up in the SCC group?
It is expected that few students will be judged to “Show Cause for Concern”, and hence be placed in the SCC category, especially in the first 3-4 years in the program. However, a student who is found to “Need Improvement” after his or her 3rd or 4th GRF, would probably be placed in the SCC group on the fifth GRF.