Academic Progress and Review Board (APRB) Process Overview
The Academic Progress and Review Board for the Master’s Programs (APRB) is a subcommittee of the HMS Committee on Governance and Oversight of Master’s Degree Programs (the Governance committee) co-chaired by the Dean and Senior Associate Dean for Graduate Education. Membership includes the current master’s program directors, or their approved designees; the Director of Administration and Student Affairs, serving ex officio; and the Master’s designee of the registrar’s office, also serving ex officio.
The charge to the APRB is to provide periodic review of student academic progress and to hear and adjudicate both progress and conduct issues. The APRB reviews student performance to ensure that each HMS student meets HMS's standards of academic standing, professional conduct and responsibility, and is on track to meet the requirements for graduation. University counsel and HMS Advising Resources faculty also may consult the APRB.
The APRB will determine whether a conflict of interest would preclude any member from participating in discussion or decision-making.
Purpose and Frequency of Review
• Reviews student grades, evaluations, and academic performance reports at least twice per year.
• May also convene additional reviews when:
o Issues are identified in routine reviews, or
o Concerns are referred by the HMS Registrar, Office for Graduate Education, or program directors.
Scope of APRB Oversight
• Academic performance issues (e.g., failing or marginal performance, concerning evaluations).
• Professionalism and conduct related to academic or extracurricular activities.
• May consider behavior both within and, in some cases, outside the Medical School community.
Examples of Unprofessional, Inappropriate, or Irresponsible Conduct
• Academic integrity violations, including:
o Cheating, plagiarism, unauthorized use of materials in exams or academic exercises.
o Misrepresentation, distortion, or serious omission of data in mentored research or capstone projects.
• Professional misconduct in academic settings, including:
o Abuse, misrepresentation, or other improper conduct toward colleagues.
o Repeated failures to meet obligations in professional or research training programs.
o Lapses in professional conduct and responsibility.
• Conduct Outside HMS (Professional and clinical roles)
o Illegal, unethical, or otherwise inappropriate behavior for medical, clinical, or scientific professionals may be reviewed by the APRB, including conduct occurring outside HMS.
o Although HMS Master’s students do not have clinical responsibilities under the auspices of the Medical School, some are licensed clinicians in affiliated hospitals or other clinical settings.
o The APRB may consider allegations of unprofessional, inappropriate, or irresponsible conduct arising in those external clinical environments.
Standards, Expectations, and Degree Conferral
• Not all forms of misconduct can be explicitly listed; students are expected to use good judgment and common sense.
• Evidence of performance is reviewed in collaboration with program directors and in the context of the student’s specific issues or needs.
• Students must comply with all disciplinary rules from matriculation through degree conferral.
• A degree will not be granted:
o If a student is not in good standing, or
o If a disciplinary charge is pending.
Review Process
• Program director is the first level of review for academic performance and/or conduct issues.
• For issues within the program director’s authority:
o The director may develop and implement a remediation plan, consulting the APRB as needed.
• The Senior Associate Dean for Graduate Education manages the meeting, providing summaries on the cases, but does not participate in any votes. The Dean for Graduate Education is a voting member of the APRB.
• For issues beyond the program director’s authority:
o The matter is immediately referred to the APRB.
o Students are informed, either in writing or in a meeting with program leadership, that their case will be brought before the APRB for review.
o Students whose case is being reviewed for consideration of AP or more elevated sanctions have the right to respond to the claims being presented to the APRB before the meeting occurs.
o The APRB reviews the case and makes a decision about the student’s status.
o The APRB may place students on any of the seven academic categories (described below); however, a formal APRB vote is required to place a student on Academic Probation, dismiss, expel, suspend, or withdraw a student from a program.
o When the APRB determines a sanction, the Office for Graduate Education (OGE) works with the program to prepare the appropriate academic sanction letter.
o Note that in all instances where the APRB votes (academic sanctions 3 – 7 below), the director(s) of the program of the student whose case is under review is recused from the vote.
o Students have the right to appeal APRB decisions. Appeals are first made to the APRB, and, if denied, may then be submitted to the Standing Committee on Rights and Responsibilities (SCRR), consistent with School policies and procedures.
Sharing Information with Institutions Where Students Have Appointments or Conduct Research
• When a student is placed in certain structured academic categories (described below):
o The institution(s) where the student holds an appointment or conducts research may be notified.
o The decision to notify depends on the nature and seriousness of the issue.
o The student will be informed of any such notifications.
Sharing Information with Course Directors
• When a student is in specified structured academic categories or repeating an academic term:
o The APRB may inform one or more course directors about the student’s past performance before the student begins new coursework.
• Purpose of sharing this information:
o To ensure appropriate observation and supervision.
o To support comprehensive evaluation of the student’s progress at the end of the relevant course work.
Structured Academic Categories
Based on its review of student performance, the program director or the APRB may place a student in any one of the structured academic categories for remediation and/or sanction. Ordinarily, remedial and/or sanction programs will be implemented by the student’s Program and be monitored by the APRB. The seven structured academic categories include the following:
1. Formal Notice
2. Monitored Academic Status
3. Academic Probation
4. Suspension
5. Requirement to Withdraw
6. Dismissal
7. Expulsion
Note that Formal Notice and Monitored Academic Status are programmatic sanctions. Academic Probation, Suspension, Requirement to Withdraw, Dismissal and/or Expulsion are voted on by the APRB and may be applied for either academic or disciplinary sanctions.