Every year, students have an opportunity, through the Graduate College, to evaluate their own progress and have their faculty advisor evaluate their progress for the previous school year. The purpose of this activity is to provide doctoral students with an opportunity to reflect on their progress, determine where academic achievement has occurred, and identify where academic improvement can be made. This annual review process focuses on student progress toward completion of program milestones and other professional activities and includes recommendations with respect to funding for continued study (i.e., assistantships, traineeship).
The College of Education will send doctoral students an email requesting that they report on their activities over the year (e.g., conference presentations, completion of milestones) and their goals for the next year. After they complete this self-evaluation, the student’s advisor provides evaluation and feedback on their student’s yearly progress. Once completed, this information is shared with the student, ideally in a face-to-face meeting. The students and their advisor also update the student’s Special Education Doctoral Plan. This form lists all program requirements and allows the student to monitor their progress on those requirements, annually.
The Department of Special Education reviews all doctoral students during a spring faculty meeting. This review process is used in years following the student's completion of a First Year Review. After the date for the review is selected (typically the April faculty meeting), the advisor is responsible for meeting with their doctoral students to discuss their progress during the previous year. This information may also be communicated through email. During this meeting, the student will provide the advisor with an updated CV and Doctoral Plan, which are used to review the student’s progress.
At the designated faculty meeting, advisors briefly summarize each of their advisees’ progress and offer recommendations for either faculty or student actions, if appropriate. The faculty as a whole then reflect on the advisor’s summary and recommendations and engage in discussion as needed. The faculty then make consensus recommendations relevant to each student’s program and progress.