Evaluation Guidelines

  1. 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.
     
  2. 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.
    • First-year examination. The examination committee includes the faculty responsible for first-year exam – instructors for MGMT 900, 933 and 953. This committee will provide grades and feedback on the student’s exam performance for the evaluation. For any student whose performance is marginal or fail according to at least one committee member, the relevant member(s) of the examination committee, in consultation with the doctoral coordinator, will determine remediation activities, which may range from some form of remedial work to a re-take of the specific exam. Re-takes are subject to the same time constraints as the original exam and must be completed before August 15th. At the end of the re-examination or remediation period, the relevant members of the examination committee will again assess the student and provide feedback for the evaluation.
    • Overall evaluation. Any student who the committee unanimously declares to have passed the exam and who 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 or unacceptable, 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-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.
    • Any student dismissed from the program has the right to appeal to the Vice-Dean for Doctoral Education at Wharton.
  3. 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. The examination committee is appointed by area coordinators in consultation with the doctoral coordinator, and it includes two to four members of the faculty from the elected subfield(s). This committee will provide grades and feedback on the student’s written and oral exam performance for the evaluation. For any student whose performance is marginal or fail, the examination committee, in consultation with the doctoral coordinator, will determine remediation activities, which may range from some form of remedial work to a re-take of the exam. Re-takes are subject to the same time constraints as the original exam and must be completed before August 15th. At the end of the re-examination or remediation period, the relevant members of the examination committee will again assess the student and provide feedback for the evaluation. Any student who fails a re-examination will be dismissed from the program.
    • 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.
    • Any student dismissed from the program has the right to appeal to the Vice-Dean for Doctoral Education at Wharton.
  4. For third-year students, the following rules shall apply:
    • The second-year paper must have been accepted by the two designated readers, and the presentation of this paper completed by May 15th.
    • Two recitation sections of MGMT 101 must be completed.
    • 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 student. 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.
    • Any student dismissed from the program has the right to appeal to the Vice-Dean for Doctoral Education at Wharton.
  5. For fourth-year students, the following rules shall apply:
    • The dissertation proposal must be approved by May 15th.
    • 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.
    • Any student dismissed from the program has the right to appeal to the Vice-Dean for Doctoral Education at Wharton.
  6. For students in their fifth year and beyond, the following rules apply:
    • There is no departmental funding available after the fifth year.
    • 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.
    • Any student dismissed from the program has the right to appeal to the Vice-Dean for Doctoral Education at Wharton.