Full Committee: The Committee for Academic Review will consist of a chairperson appointed by the Dean of the Graduate School, one of the Co-Directors (or their designee) of each MTA, one faculty representative from each training program (PhD in Clinical Research, MDSAI, MSBS, MS in Biostatistics, MS in Epidemiology, MPH, MSGC, MSCR, MHA, and MSHCDL).
Subcommittees of CAR: Since the educational process is considerably different for PhD students and master’s degree students, CAR is divided into two subcommittees, the PhD Subcommittee and the Master’s Subcommittee. These subcommittees hear cases that pertain to their respective students. In the event that a matter involves both MS and PhD students, the Chair of CAR has the authority to decide what group should preside over the investigation. For example, the Chair may decide to form an ad hoc committee consisting of members from each subcommittee.
Investigating subcommittees: If a matter under review by CAR requires an extensive investigation, the chair of CAR and the Senior Associate review could choose to empanel an Investigating Committee that will perform a full investigation, including collecting and assessing documentation and interviewing people with pertinent information. This could also include recommending a plan of action. The Investigating Committee will provide a written report of its investigation, findings, and recommendations to the subcommittee for review and decisions. The subcommittee should consist of at least three people. The subcommittee can also include ad hoc members if deemed necessary by the CAR chair and Senior Associate Dean. Ad hoc members could include members of the student’s training area or thesis advisory committee.
updated and approved by Academic Steering Committee Feb. 10, 2026
Appeals of decisions made by a Program’s review/discipline committee are first heard by the Committee for Academic Review.
Students also have the right to appeal a decision rendered by the CAR to the Graduate School Dean. In both cases, appeals must be submitted in writing (email) within fourteen (14) days after receiving notice of the decision and must specify the basis for appeal.
Appeal of CAR Decision
Appeals are made directly to the Dean of the Graduate School.
The Dean of the Graduate School may assign a panel of Senior Associate Deans for academic programs in the Graduate School to review the appeal. A panel member who is identified as having a conflict of interest may be replaced at the discretion of the Dean of the Graduate School.
The appeals process will entail a review of the student's written appeal and the record from CAR to determine whether the decision was arbitrary and capricious or inconsistent with institutional policies or procedures.
The appeals process may include requests to hear from the student or other individuals involved with the case.
If impaneled, the Senior Associate Deans will make their recommendation to the Dean of the Graduate School.
The Dean of the Graduate School will issue the final decision, which may uphold, modify, or overturn the CAR recommendation.
The Dean of the Graduate School’s decision is final and binding.
Written outcome of the appeal will be sent via email to the student, CAR and all those copied on the original CAR decision.
NOTE: Grade appeals do not utilize this process. Instead, grade appeals should follow the.
Students in graduate programs at ISMMS have been carefully selected for the demands of graduate study. Some students, no matter how qualified, may have difficulty in meeting the graduate program’s requirements, such as satisfactory completion of courses and other requirements within a given timeframe or maintaining standards of professional conduct at all times. Such cases will be reviewed by the appropriate program committee for possible remediation or disciplinary action. Processes for review of student performance/behavior are detailed below.
Each program should conduct an annual review of all students currently enrolled in their program. For students who are not making satisfactory academic progress or have not maintained acceptable standards of professional behavior, plans for remediation or dismissal should be developed as per program specific guidelines.
The Committee for Academic Review is the primary review/disciplinary body of the Graduate School. The committee meets when necessary. Meetings will be called by the Senior Associate Dean of Postdoctoral and Student Affairs or the Chair of CAR whenever a student review is necessary.
When a program has its own review/disciplinary process, student issues should be reviewed as per that program’s documented process. In such cases, CAR will play a role only if the student appeals a decision (see section below on the appeal process). When a program does not have its own process, CAR will be used for initial review.
When a program does not have an internal student performance review committee, a Program Director or other Graduate School leader will confer with the Senior Associate Dean for Postdoctoral and Student Affairs to determine an appropriate course of action. There are two possible courses of action:
The Senior Associate Dean and Program Director will perform a full review of the matter and render a judgment. When appropriate, a student should be given an opportunity to meet with the Program Director and Senior Associate Dean to make a statement and answer questions about the incident in question. If it is determined that some action needs to be taken, the Program Director and/or Senior Associate Dean are responsible for meeting with the student and providing him/her/them with both an oral and written summary of the actions taken. During this discussion, the student must be informed of the process available for an appeal of the decision (see below for details regarding the appeals process).
The matter will be referred to the Graduate School’s Committee for Academic Review. As a first step, the matter will be reviewed and triaged by the Senior Associate Dean for Postdoctoral and Student Affairs, the Director of the Office of Postdoctoral and Student Affairs, and the Chair of CAR (this group constitutes the “CAR Executive Committee”). This triage can result in three possible actions:
When the matter under review does not fall within the jurisdiction of CAR, it is either returned to the program for action or directed to a different review group (for example Curricular Affairs, COPHE, etc.)
When the matter under review is minor, routine, and/or does not require an investigation, the Executive Committee can propose a plan of action to the appropriate subcommittee of CAR for a vote of approval. This vote can be done at a meeting of the group or via email.
When the matter under review requires a more in-depth review or an investigation, the Chair of CAR will call a meeting of the appropriate subcommittee of CAR for consideration of the matter. The Chair and Senior Associate Dean will work together to collect necessary documents to be distributed to the committee and invite guests to present pertinent information to the committee.
The Senior Associate Dean will also assign a senior senior Graduate School staff person to help guide the student through the CAR process. This person is not an advocate/advisor but serves only as a guide through the CAR (and possible appeal) process.
During the review, it is possible that the subcommittee requires additional documentation or would like to interview additional people. The Chair and Senior Associate Dean will make arrangements for such requests.
Once the subcommittee has considered all available information, it will render a decision regarding the validity of the complaint against the student and provide a written plan for corrective action. This could include a remediation plan or disciplinary action. Once the committee has reached a decision, the CAR Chair and the Senior Associate Dean are responsible for meeting with the student and providing him/her/them with both an oral and written summary of the actions taken by CAR. During this discussion, the student must be informed of the process available for an appeal of the decision (see details regarding ).
As mentioned above, students under review must be informed in writing of any requirements for remediation or disciplinary actions taken by CAR. The student must sign a copy of the document to indicate that he/she/they has received it and understands the content. This signed document will be added to the student’s academic file.
The student should also be given an opportunity to invite faculty or other relevant people to speak to the subcommittee on the student’s behalf.
The student is allowed to bring an observer to the proceedings. This is person cannot answer/ask questions, but instead is there only to help the student remember what happened during the meeting.