IX. REASONABLE PROGRESS AND PERIODIC EVALUATIONS OF PROGRESS
Evaluation of student progress is an essential feature of our graduate program. The core purpose of evaluation is to ensure that students complete the program on time and achieve the highest standards of excellence in their development as scholars. Periodic evaluation by Sociology faculty offers students substantive guidance about their projects and a reminder to be timely in the completion of their work. Faculty are committed to periodic evaluation of student progress as a constructive process.
In some instances, the department will decide that a student may not continue in the program, either because of clear signs of lack of progress, or because the program is no longer serving the needs and interests of that student. However, this decision, consistent with all assessments, is made according to the guidelines for review set forth above (see second-year review) and below, and in as transparent a fashion as possible.
A. The Annual Review and Individual Development Plans and Second-Year Review
The primary instruments for periodic evaluation are the annual IDPs and the second-year review. To offer feedback in the timeliest way, all students are reviewed annually by their advisor and Sociology graduate faculty, including those in the advanced stages of dissertation work. Different cohorts are reviewed at different times of the year. Students are evaluated on the quality of their performance in class, on independent research projects including qualifying papers, and in their success in meeting the department’s expectations regarding the reasonable progress deadlines. Pertinent information on the student’s performance in coursework, the content and accomplishments of their qualifying papers, their developing skills as a sociologist, and the personal goals they hope to achieve by participating in the program, is gathered into each student’s Individual Development Plan (IDP). Each student will review the content of their IDP with their primary advisor, and the completed form will be reviewed by the Graduate Program Director and graduate faculty and then returned to the student, cc’ing the advisor. The IDP is re-visited and updated each year. A student is in the program, that helps to ensure student’s work and progress are in line with their short- and long-term goals. More specifically:
a. Criteria for Evaluation:
• Course grades. Attention is given to both the student’s distribution of grades and the overall GPA.
• Progress on Qualifying Papers and on the Dissertation. The department considers the quality of this aspect of the student’s work and the timeliness with which it is completed.
• Incompletes. Carrying Incompletes, and/or a recurrent failure to complete coursework on time, is considered a cause of concern. [See earlier discussion on Incompletes.]
• Other factors. The faculty may also consider additional factors, including for example, a student’s ability to respond thoughtfully to faculty feedback, originality and rigor of a student’s work, the breadth of a student’s course of study, and compliance with the university’s code of ethics.
b. Timing of Reviews: First- and second-year students are reviewed in late March, so that the faculty have more than one full semester of student performance to consider in the evaluation. Students in the third through seventh years are reviewed in the fall semester.
c. Providing Feedback to Students: The Graduate Program Director returns the IDP to the student within four weeks following the Annual Review, summarizing the faculty’s assessment of the student’s progress and offering constructive criticism and guidance for moving forward. Students in years 7 and beyond in the program must also complete an addendum to the IDP required by the School of Graduate Studies [Home Page | SGS Online Development Plan (rutgers.edu) or IDP platform ]. It too is reviewed by the primary advisor and the Graduate Director, with each offering brief comments on the student’s progress towards degree completion.
B. Probation, Formal Academic Warnings, Work Plans, and Discontinuation
If a student fails to meet a guideline, the GPD will place the student on probation with a formal academic warning. The Program may require a written work plan from the student, with the full involvement of the student’s advisor(s) and committee members. The work plan will acknowledge key dates and activities to ensure continuation in the program by completing the necessary task before reaching program deadlines. A follow-up letter from the GPD will indicate either “Satisfactory” or “Unsatisfactory” progress on the student’s work plan. Note: Work plans may be required of any student, whether under the-2-4-6 plan or not, for missing important guidelines and issues related to time to degree. They can be implemented on a case-by-case basis.
If the student has not completed the required work by the Annual Review Meetings, held each fall semester for years 3+, we will also assess the progress of students who have not completed their second-year paper with a review process starting in year 2 by the GPD and the Graduate Program Committee Members. See the 2-4-6 requirements presented earlier. Spring semester review for years 1 and 2 will be conducted along with time devoted to assessing the progress of students in years 4, 5 and 6 regarding their Second Qualifying Paper and Dissertation Proposal Defense. With each review the student and the student’s advisor will receive an annual review letter noting satisfactory or unsatisfactory progress regarding their progress on these benchmarks in addition to other comments. To continue the program, the student must show sufficient promise to be able to conduct original, self-directed research with only limited but likely essential guidance from advisor(s) and committee members. The student will have until the deadline (see above) to complete the required work or face program discontinuation for not fulfilling the qualifying project.
One additional option is Matriculation Continued status, discussed briefly here and in more detail in section XI C below.
C. Discontinuation for Other Reasons, LOAs
Students could face discontinuation from the program for several other reasons in addition to missing essential program deadlines. These include (but are not limited to):
1. Registration Lapses. Any unapproved lapse in registration will be considered a voluntary withdrawal from the program. In extenuating circumstances, students may request a formal leave of absence or register as Matriculation Continued (MC) (maximum 2 semesters) with the permission of the student’s advisor(s) and Graduate Program Director. In addition to MCs students may request formal leave of absences, LOAs. LOAs are rare and given only under special circumstances. Students on funding packages may not request LOAs. When a student takes a LOA they formally withdraw from the program. The student would have NO formal affiliation with Rutgers University. This means the student’s Rutgers email would end as would any access to Rutgers resources such as Rutgers Libraries, etc. It is possible for the student to be re-admitted to the graduate program at a later date with the support of the student’s advisor(s) and committee members along with the approval of the GPD. Note: A student on MC or LOA may not bank their funding. In such cases, the student’s funding is lost for those semesters away.
2. Receiving Two formal academic warnings from the graduate program will result in discontinuation from the program.
3. Ten Year Maximum. The SGS Graduate Student Handbook states: “All students are expected to complete their degrees within 10 years. If a student has been enrolled for 10 years without completing the degree, and the student’s continuation beyond 10 years has not been approved under the foregoing process, the student will be informed that he or she has ninety days to show cause why he or she should not be dismissed from the School of Graduate Studies.”
4. Losing Contact: Any student, including ABDs, who is not in regular contact with their advisor(s) and committee members for a year (2 consecutive semesters) will be viewed as having voluntarily withdrawn from the program. We define regular contact as an in-person meeting, virtual (e.g., Zoom), or phone conversation with follow-up emails at least once each semester between the advisor and student. It is the student’s responsibility to stay in contact with their advisor and committee members and to respond to faculty and program administrator inquiries. Faculty should keep emails and other records of contact with their advisees, in case a student contests discontinuation. Not completing the annual IDP review process is considered as “losing contact”.
5. Excessive Incompletes: Any student with more than 2 incompletes in any semester will receive a formal academic warning from the GPD and may face discontinuation from the program. As noted above, the SGS Graduate Handbook requires that a student with 2 or 1 incomplete(s) has only 1 semester to reduce the student’s incompletes to 1 or none respectively. Any student who has not completed their final incomplete within 1 year will receive a formal academic warning and may face discontinuation from the program.
6. Academic Integrity: Every student is expected to demonstrate professional behavior at the highest levels. Demonstrating academic integrity is essential for one’s career. Failing to perform with integrity in your training will result in at least an official academic warning and possibly being discontinued from the graduate program depending on the severity, such as serious plagiarism and or use of A1 to generate work that is not of your creation is considered dishonest. See the School of Graduate Studies link for more detailed information. https://policies.rutgers.edu/B.aspx?BookId=11914&PageId=459231
< Previous Section: VIII. Faculty & Student Communication and Support | Next Section: X. Forms >