PhD Annual Review
All PhD students in the HCDE program will be reviewed annually to assess each student’s progress through the program and make related recommendations.
The purpose of this review is for students to receive constructive feedback on their work toward their degree. To make this possible, students will submit annually a set of materials (a completed Annual Review Form, a transcript, and a current Course of Study Form) describing their progress through the program. The faculty will review the materials and provide students with feedback to help them continue to advance through the program.
Students who are making progress toward their degree can expect thoughtful recommendations that will help them continue advancing through the program toward their career goals. In exceptional instances when a student is not making satisfactory progress, she or he will receive a rating of concern
and be asked to participate in a mid-year, secondary review as described below. Students who do not meet basic expectations for progress in the program may receive a probationary warning.
Annual Review Process
The annual review is a process that involves all the department’s PhD students and tenure-line faculty.
All students who have been admitted to the PhD program but have not yet successfully defended a dissertation will participate in the annual review every year. Students who are officially on leave from UW in the winter quarter may be excused from the annual review for one year; a student may not be excused from the review process for more than one year while in the program. If a student does not participate in the required annual review process, they will not be eligible to register for classes in subsequent quarters until they have met the participation requirements.
The review committee will include all tenure-line faculty members in HCDE with the exception of those faculty members who are on sabbatical leave or are otherwise formally excused by the Chair of HCDE.
What is the schedule?
The general timeline for the annual review process is shown in the table below.
No later than
All PhD students submit a completed Annual Review Form, a transcript, and a current course of study form to the Student Services Manager.
ninth week of
|Review committee sends individual review letters to all PhD students.|
|Second week of fall quarter||PhD students who receive a less than satisfactory rating in spring quarter submit an updated Annual Review Form and a cover letter explaining what they are doing to improve their performance in the program.|
|Fourth week of fall quarter||Review committee sends individual review letters to all PhD students who were required to participate in this mid-year review process.|
What are the potential outcomes of the annual review?
After the review committee has met, it will assign all students a rating of progress. Those ratings and associated requirements are shown in the table below.
Student Action Required
|Satisfactory||Student is making expected level of progress through the program.||Student continues appropriate work in the program until the next winter’s annual review cycle.|
|Concern||Student is not progressing through the program as expected. Specific reasons for this rating will be identified in individual letters.||Student meets with her/his advisor to discuss concerns mentioned in the committee’s letter and to make plans to address those concerns. In the next review cycle (either a midyear or annual review), student submits an updated Annual Review Form and a cover letter explaining what she/he is doing to improve her or his performance in the program.|
|Probation||Student is failing to meet in a significant manner one or more expectations associated with the program.||Student meets with her/his advisor to discuss concerns mentioned in the committee’s letter and to make plans to address those concerns. In the next review cycle (either a midyear or annual review), student submits an updated Annual Review Form and a cover letter explaining what she/he is doing to improve her or his performance in the program. If the review committee rates a student’s progress as probation in two review cycles, she or he should discontinue enrollment in the program.|