Department of Architecture Graduate Academic Review Policy
All of the following graduate degree programs within the Department of Architecture are expected to comply with the stated policy: PhD, SMArchS, SMVisS, SMBT, MArch.
Minimum Academic Standards and Ratings
Graduate students in the Department of Architecture are considered to be making satisfactory academic progress towards their degrees if they maintain a grade point average of 4.0 or higher and meet their degree requirements and the Department English as a Second Language requirement. In addition, MArch candidates must make satisfactory progress through the studio sequence, and
PhD students must progress satisfactorily through their additional requirements (qualifying paper, language exams, major and minor exams, thesis proposal, etc.) on a timeline determined by each of the PhD programs. Continuing registration and financial aid is based on satisfactory academic performance.
End of Term Academic Reviews
It is the responsibility of the academic advisors, degree program heads, academic administrators and the Graduate Officer to monitor the academic progress of the graduate students and to make recommendations at the end of the term if any action is necessary.
• The academic administrators will send a reminder to all advisors to review their advisee’s academic record on WebSIS after the final grade deadline for the term. (Last week in December for fall term and last week of May for spring term.)
• The academic administrators upon request will distribute copies of the term grade summary report generated by the Registrar to discipline groups. (Fall term summary reports are published the first week of January; spring term reports the last week of May.)
• Discipline areas will meet to discuss student academic progress as needed. If there is a need for action it is brought to the attention of the academic administrator in charge. *Design studio faculty will have a regularly scheduled meeting the week of final exams specifically to discuss studio progress.
• The academic administrators and the Graduate Officer meet to decide on recommended action for the Institute Committee on Graduate Programs (CGP) grade meeting. The CGP meeting, chaired by the Dean of Graduate Education, takes place the second week of IAP for fall grades and the week of Commencement for spring grades. The Dean pays particular attention to students with term GPA ratings below 3.5 and students who are taking an unusually long time to complete their degree.
*The end-of-term design faculty meeting reviews studio progress based on available studio grades and faculty discussion. Faculty as a whole will decide upon appropriate action. Because this meeting is held prior to the posting of all final grades, adjustments can be made subsequently by the student’s advisor and the administrator.
Informing the Student of Inadequate Progress
Depending upon the degree of the students’ academic problems or issues, one or more of the following actions will be taken.
1. Advisor meeting. (advisor + student) The advisor will call a meeting to discuss difficulties in academic progress, the perceived causes, and identify steps needed to be taken towards improvement. Some degree programs provide mid-term evaluations and/or final evaluations, which will be taken into account.
2. Department warning letter. (advisor + student) This letter is used to let a student know there is an academic deficiency or lack of progress through the degree program and outlines what the student needs to do to improve. Students are given an opportunity to respond in writing and the advisor will schedule a meeting prior to the start of the next term to discuss steps needed towards improvement. The letter is crafted by the degree administrator and the advisor and signed by the Department Head.
3. Dean’s warning letter. (advisor + student + program director) This letter is used to let a student know there is a more serious academic deficiency and outlines what the student needs to do in order to improve his or her academic performance. Students are given an opportunity to respond in writing and the advisor will schedule a meeting that includes the student and the program director either before or after the Dean’s warning is issued but prior to the start of the next term. The degree administrator customizes the letter, with input from the advisor and the program director. The Dean of Graduate Education signs it.
If the student does not make satisfactory progress the next term, the department may request a required withdrawal.
4. Dean’s required withdrawal letter. (advisor + student + program director + department head) This action is taken when a student experiences serious academic difficulties over a period of two or more terms. Generally a student has previously received both a Departmental and a Dean’s warning letter. For every student who is required to withdraw, the advisor will schedule a meeting prior to issuing the withdrawal letter that includes the student, the director of the degree program and/or the department head. In addition to the letter from the Dean of Graduate Education, the Department will issue a letter documenting the reason(s) for required withdrawal and the terms (if any) under which the student may apply for readmission to the same program.
Quick Links
Master of Architecture (MArch)
Master of Science in Architecture Studies (SMArchS)
Master of Science in Building Technology (SMBT)
Master of Science in Visual Studies (SMVisS)
Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)
