PhD Evaluation Guidelines

All doctoral students in the management department will be evaluated by the doctoral coordinator and the doctoral advisory group (the “evaluation committee”) for good standing at a meeting in late May or early June of each academic year. The evaluation process should serve as an opportunity to offer constructive advice. However, students found to not be in good standing are at risk of loss of funding and dismissal from the program.

1. For first-year students, the following rules shall apply:
   • • Grades: To remain in good standing, students must maintain a grade average of at least B+.
     • Overall evaluation: Any student who has maintained the required grade standard will be deemed to have met the academic standard for continuation in the program. Should grade performance be marginal or unacceptable, the doctoral committee will decide, following a simple majority voting rule, whether to dismiss the student from the program or to establish additional remedial work. This vote will also take into consideration feedback from the student’s first-year research assistantship supervisor as well as written feedback from any other faculty members who have significant information concerning the student’s progress. In the event of a tied vote, the doctoral coordinator will cast the deciding vote.
2. For second-year students, the following rules shall apply:
   • • Grades: To remain in good standing, students need to maintain a grade average of at least B+ with no “permanent incompletes” (terminology used by the university to indicate an incomplete more than a year old, denoted by I* on the transcript).
     • Second-year qualifying examination: Click to open Policies Handbook.
     • Overall evaluation: Any student who the committee unanimously declares to have passed the exam and has maintained the required grade standard will be deemed to have met the academic standard for continuation in the program. Should grade or exam performance be marginal, the evaluation committee and examination committee will jointly decide, following a simple majority voting rule, whether to dismiss the student from the program or to establish additional remedial work. This vote will also take into consideration feedback from the student’s first- and second-year research assistantship supervisor(s), the grade on the first-year examination, as well as written feedback from any other faculty members who have significant information concerning the student’s progress. In the event of a tied vote, the doctoral coordinator will cast the deciding vote.
3. For third-year students, the following rules shall apply:
   • • The second-year paper must have been successfully defended by August 31 before the beginning of the third year.
     • All course requirements must be fulfilled with no incompletes of any type on record and an overall grade average of at least B+.
     • The evaluation committee will review the performance of any student who has not met these considerations and decide, following a simple majority voting rule, whether to retain or dismiss the studen The committee will solicit input from faculty serving as advisors or readers for the second-year paper, from other faculty involved with the student in collaborative research, and faculty instructors for any classes taken during the third year, as well as information from the first- and second-year evaluations. In the event of a tied vote, the doctoral coordinator shall cast the deciding vote.
4. For fourth-year students, the following rules shall apply:
   • • The dissertation proposal must be approved by May 15th. This is considered a “last resort” deadline. Students should strive to defend earlier in the fourth year to have more time to prepare for the job market the following summer.
     • The evaluation committee will review the performance of any student who has not met these considerations. The committee will also solicit input from faculty serving as dissertation committee members and from any other faculty involved with the student in collaborative research to decide, following a simple majority voting rule, whether to grant fifth-year funding. In the event of a tied vote, the doctoral coordinator shall cast the deciding vote.
5. For students in their fifth year and beyond, the following rules apply:
   • • Students must be making satisfactory progress towards completing their dissertations.
     • The evaluation committee will review the performance of each student annually, soliciting input from faculty serving as dissertation committee members and from any other faculty involved with the student in collaborative research to decide, following a simple majority voting rule, whether the student is making satisfactory progress towards the completion of their dissertation. In the event of a tied vote, the doctoral coordinator shall cast the deciding vote.
     • The department will not provide a stipend after the fifth year. At the discretion of the department chair, the department may agree to cover fees and health insurance for students who remain beyond the fifth year.

Note: Any student dismissed from the program has the right to appeal to the Vice Dean of Wharton Doctoral Programs.