For these reasons, we propose that there be a procedure to review graduate student progress at least annually. This procedure is intended for use when students are primarily engaged in research or in preparation for general examinations; when one is primarily taking courses, grades are sufficient indicators of progress. GSAS could specify that students in or after a particular year must complete the form, leaving departments the option to ask for reports from students and advisors in earlier years as they wish.

Desirable features for a regular review procedure are that it: (1) be simple, involving the minimum hassle for students and faculty, (2) be based on student input, (3) provide feedback to the student, and (4) determine the annual satisfactory / unsatisfactory reports sent to GSAS by departments.

The following procedure is designed to achieve these goals.

1. Each student prepares a short report on progress made and future plans. The report is read, commented on and signed by the student's advisor (and/or perhaps the thesis committee) after meeting the student. An estimated degree date for the student should be given.

   The attached form, based on similar ones used at Berkeley and Columbia, provides a suitable format for these brief reports. It should be accompanied by a cover letter, probably from the Assistant Dean for Student Affairs, informing students about the review procedure outlined here, the G-10 rule and the availability of the Dean to advise students concerned about their academic progress.

2. The student must file the signed report by a particular deadline with the Director of Graduate Studies (DGS) or departmental Committee on Higher Degrees (CHD), as appropriate.

3. The DGS or CHD uses the student's report as the basis for the departmental review of the student's progress. (Such reviews are already required by GSAS.) The result of the review, whether positive or negative, is communicated in writing to the student and to GSAS by the DGS. The DGS shall be the first point of contact for questions from students.

4. If the DGS or CHD returns an unsatisfactory report on a student, or if the student's report and/or advisor's comments seem to warrant it, the DGS will arrange a meeting between the student and whomever of his/her advisor, thesis committee and the DGS seems appropriate. In any case, each year in or after the eighth year or after the departmental average time to degree, students should meet with their thesis committee to consider what remains to be done to complete the degree.

Paul Callan
Secretary, on behalf of the Council