The Academic Progression: VP&S Academic Promotion and Academic Appeal Policy

  

Overview/Rationale

The Academic Progression Policy provides a structured and transparent framework to guide student advancement throughout the medical education program. It is designed to support informed, consistent decision-making to assure student readiness to advance through the curriculum while ensuring patient safety; promote fairness and equity; and ensure that students receive the academic and personal support necessary for success. This policy not only upholds the institutional commitment to educational excellence and student well-being but also plays a critical role in maintaining accreditation standards and fostering a positive and effective learning environment.

To ensure clarity and fairness, the policy establishes explicit benchmarks and criteria that students must meet to progress through the curriculum. The policy also outlines the due process protections afforded to students when an adverse academic or professionalism action is considered. This includes:

  • Right to notification of impending adverse action against the student. Every student has a right to review the concerns raised regarding their progression and to respond to those concerns before an adverse action is determined against that student.
  • Right to Appeal: Students have the right to challenge decisions. The policy provides a clearly defined appeals process for such cases.
  • Conflict of Interest Protections: Individuals involved in initiating an adverse action, such as course or clerkship directors who assign a failing grade, must recuse themselves from the subsequent decision-making process in order to prevent conflicts of interest.

The policy further clarifies financial considerations associated with academic progression:

  • Students required to complete substantial make-up coursework or assessments may incur additional tuition costs.
  • Students repeating any academic year are responsible for the full tuition and associated fees for that year.

Oversight of the academic progression review process is provided by the Academic Review Committee (ARC), which assesses and acts on recommendations from the Student Competency Committee(s). Additionally, students may bring appeals of adverse action decisions by the ARC to the Academic Appeals Committee.

Accreditation Standards

LCME Accreditation Standard:

9.6 Setting Standards of Achievement  

9.9 Student Advancement and Appeal Process 

10.3 Policies Regarding Student Selection/Progress and Their Dissemination 

11.1 Academic Advising and Academic Counseling 

Stakeholders

  • Students  
  • Office of Medical Education Staff 
  • Course/Clerkship Directors 

Committees Involved:

The following committees are involved in the academic progression process:

  • Student Competency Committees (SCC)
  • Student Skill Improvement and Attainment Team (SSIAT)
  • Academic Review Committee (ARC)
  • Academic Appeals Committee (AAC)

Student Competency Committees (SCC)

Student Competency Committees (SCCs) are responsible for monitoring student progress and making recommendations for promotion throughout the academic year. For the Classes of 2026 and 2027, the Fundamentals Faculty Committee (FFC) serves as the SCC for the pre-clinical phase of the curriculum, while the Clinical Faculty Committee (CFC) fulfills this role for the Major Clinical Year (MCY) and Differentiation & Integration (D&I) phases. Beginning with the Classes of 2028 and beyond, dedicated SCCs will assume these responsibilities across all phases of the curriculum. These committees will evaluate student performance using the Medical Education Program Objectives (MEPOs) and their associated domains. Feedback will be shared with students and their coaches through MEPO dashboards, providing a comprehensive overview of each student’s progress and highlighting areas for growth. Both the FFC/CFC and SCCs may refer students in need of additional support to the Student Skill Improvement and Attainment Team (SSIAT). The SCCs are composed of faculty at large and a limited number of course and clerkship directors.

Student Skill Improvement and Attainment Team (SSIAT)

This group is composed of the Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Support and Services, Learning Specialists, and other faculty members. The SSIAT reviews students with a pattern of competency deficiency to determine what help might be offered / referrals needed. The group meets to discuss students referred by the SCC who are potentially in need of remediation (for example, patterns of competency issues, repeated professionalism concerns, clusters of assessment failures or challenges, sudden decline in performance, course failure). They can refer students for support from the Center for Education Research and Evaluation, the Office of Disability Services, Student Health on Haven, as well as other resources. For students with significant difficulty, the SSIAT can prepare a plan for remediation with specific academic concerns and corresponding goals and timeline for completion. This remediation plan may be shared with the Student Competency Committee and/or the Academic Review Committee.

Academic Review Committee (ARC)

The ARC has two subcommittees: Academic Progress Subcommittee and the Academic Infractions Subcommittee.

The Academic Progress Subcommittee is convened by the Senior Associate Dean for Curricular Affairs and plays a central role in overseeing student academic progression and graduation readiness. Specifically, the subcommittee is responsible for:

  • Conducting in-depth evaluations of students who have not met key academic milestones or core competencies as defined by the Medical Education Program Objectives (MEPOs)
  • Reviewing, endorsing, and/or determining academic progression and graduation recommendations submitted by the Student Competency Committees (SCCs).
  • Following information gathered from the student, determining adverse actions such as remediation and recommendations for dismissal.

The subcommittee meets regularly to:

  • Review formal reports and recommendations from SCCs.
  • Consider student responses and other relevant documentation.
  • Deliberate and recommend appropriate actions, which may include individualized remediation plans and adverse action decisions, including placement on academic probation, suspension, and dismissal from the program.

All recommendations resulting in possible adverse actions made by the subcommittee are formally reviewed before being forwarded to the Dean or the Dean’s designee for final approval. This process ensures that decisions are made consistently, fairly, and in accordance with university policy and the curricular policies of the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons (VP&S).

The Academic Infractions Subcommittee, convened by the Associate Dean for Student Affairs, Support and Services, addresses cases of academic misconduct and professionalism violations, excluding those under the Rules of University- Conduct. Activated on an ad hoc basis, the subcommittee investigates allegations such as cheating, plagiarism, falsification of records, and breaches of professional behavior, following procedures outlined in Columbia’s academic violations policy. https://cssi.columbia.edu/content/academic-violations. After the Academic Infractions-Subcommittee –of the Academic Review Committee (ARC) review, final recommendations are submitted to the Dean or designee. The subcommittee includes a representative from the Columbia University Center for Student Success and Intervention (CSSI) and an ex-officio representative from the Office of Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging. The policy for the Dean’s Discipline process can be found here.

Academic Appeals Committee (AAC)

The Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) reviews student appeals of adverse academic or disciplinary decisions made by the Academic Review Committee (ARC). If the AAC upholds the original decision, the student may submit a final appeal within seven business days to the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine or designee, who will make a final determination.

Conflicts of interest for committee members:

A strict recusal policy is enforced for members of both the Academic Review Committee (ARC) and the Academic Appeals Committee (AAC).

  • Mandatory Recusal: Any committee member who has a potential conflict of interest must recuse themselves from deliberations and voting on the case in question. Conflicts may include, but are not limited to:
    • Having issued a failing grade to the student
    • Having provided clinical or mental health care to the student
    • Having any other direct involvement or personal connection to the matter
  • Disclosure Requirement: Members must disclose any such conflict to the Committee Chair prior to the meeting in which the case is to be considered.
  • Committee Separation: To preserve the independence of the appeals process, individuals serving on the Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) may not simultaneously serve on the Academic Review Committee (ARC).

Requirements for Academic Promotion

Passing the Fundamentals Phase

To advance to the Major Clinical Year (MCY), students must:

  • Pass all required courses in the Fundamentals Phase curriculum.
  • Demonstrate satisfactory fulfillment of VP&S professionalism standards.
  • Demonstrate satisfactory fulfillment of VP&S technical (non-academic) standards.

Course Completion Requirements
 Each course in the Fundamentals Phase is comprised of multiple components (e.g., blocks or sections), all of which must be passed to receive a passing grade for the course. Passing criteria for each course component are detailed in the course syllabus. Typically, a minimum score of 70% on a block exam, assignment, or section evaluation is required to pass. Scores >70-75% are monitored by the SSCs and multiple scores in this area may result in referral to the SSIAT.

Assessment Administration
All assessments must be completed within the designated exam window. Exceptions may be made only in cases of extenuating circumstances, which must be communicated by the student to the course director as early as possible, and no later than 24 hours after the closing of the exam window. Failure to take an assessment as scheduled without timely communication may result in automatic failure of the assessment.

Assessment Retests and Remediation
In the case that a student fails an assessment, assessment retests can be given in various formats at the course director's discretion and the course director will construct this remediation exercise with clear criteria for passing Retests must occur within the scheduled make-up window or at another time mutually agreed upon by the student and course director.

  • In Semester 1, retests typically occur on the weekend following the exam week.
  • In Semesters 2 and 3, retests typically occur during curricular breaks (e.g., winter, spring, summer) or prior to starting MCY, depending on timing.
  • If a student fails more than one assessment or course section in the same exam week, the retesting schedule will be coordinated across courses.

While under remediation, students receive a temporary course grade of Credit Pending (CP). This grade must be resolved to either Pass (P) or Fail (F) prior to advancement to the next semester. If unresolved, the Student Competency Committee (SCC) may recommend the student not progress.

First-Year First-Semester Exception
During the first semester only, students who fail a retest will be offered one additional remediation opportunity before a final course grade of Fail is assigned. Failure of a course in the first semester precludes advancement to the second semester.

Subsequent Semesters
In the second and third semesters, a failure of a retest following an initial assessment failure will result in a final course grade of Fail (F).

Failure Criteria
 Course directors may assign a failing grade under the following conditions:

  • Failure to meet minimum passing criteria as defined in the syllabus.
  • Failure to meet professionalism expectations.
  • Failure to meet stated course learning objectives, requirements, and/or competencies articulated in the syllabus.

Review by the Student Competency Committee (SCC)

The SCC reviews all course performance metrics, focusing on failing (<70%) and Low Pass (70-75%) scores, professionalism concerns (including attendance, assignment completion, etc.) and failure to complete other course requirements.

Students may be referred to the Student Skill and Improvement Attainment Team (SSIAT) for support when appropriate.

The SCC may recommend to the Academic Review Committee (ARC) Progress Subcommittee that a student not progress or that remediation be required under the following circumstances:

  • Failure of a course.
  • In the first semester: failure of two retests after an initial assessment failure.
  • In later semesters: failure of a retest after an initial assessment failure.
  • A pattern of multiple (≥2) failures or low passes across sections/blocks/courses
  • Failure to meet VP&S professionalism standards.
  • Failure to meet VP&S technical (non-academic) standards

 

Responsibility for the final decision lies with the ARC.

The SCC or any faculty member may also refer students to the ARC Academic Infractions Subcommittee for professionalism or academic integrity violations, including those outlined in institutional policy: https://cssi.columbia.edu/content/academic-violations.

Course or Phase Remediation and Repetition

If the SCC recommends that a student not advance, the ARC may require remediation, which may include:

  • Completion of a formal remediation plan.
  • Repetition of specific courses or the entire semester.
  • Repetition of the entire Fundamentals Phase.

Remediation requirements may involve tuition charges depending on their scope and duration.

Re-entry and Repetition Policy
Students who fail one or more courses in the first semester may be offered the opportunity to leave the curriculum and re-enter the following academic year upon meeting ARC-specified requirements. This opportunity is discretionary and not guaranteed.

Repetition of a course or the Fundamentals Phase constitutes a full restart. The student must comply with all current academic policies and will be permitted the same number of assessment retests as new enrollees.

Students may only repeat a failed course or the Fundamentals Phase once. After a second course failure, a student may be subject to dismissal from the program by the ARC.

Major Clinical Year Phase:

Students must pass all required clerkships of the Major Clinical Year. Passing all requirements of the Major Clinical Year is required for promotion to the Differentiation and Integration curriculum. Students must follow the USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 policy.

The senior associate dean for curricular affairs will articulate the grading expectations to students at the start of MCY and each clerkship director is also expected to provide grading expectations in the syllabus as well as during clerkship orientation. 

Passing Clerkships

The standards for passing a clerkship will be delineated by the clerkship director in the course syllabus and articulated at the start of each clerkship. This includes the minimum passing score for a clerkship’s NBME Clinical Subject (shelf) exam. In the case that a student does not pass a shelf exam or other clerkship assessment on the first attempt, the first assessment score will be the one that “counts” in the grading process, but assessments must be retaken and passed to pass the clerkship.

If a student fails a shelf exam or required assessment in the clerkship, the student will be allowed one opportunity to retake the exam or assessment. The student must meet with their clerkship director to schedule a retake. The student may also be referred to the SSIAT for additional support services, as appropriate. The student will be assigned a provisional grade of Credit Pending (CP) until the shelf exam or clerkship assessment is passed. If a student fails the exam or assessment on the second attempt, the SCC will refer the student to the ARC (academic review committee). The ARC, in consultation with recommendations from SSIAT, will determine which steps are necessary, e.g. completing remediation, before a third attempt is allowed. Remediation may include additional weeks of clerkship.

MCY Student Competency Committee (SCC) Review  

The Student Competency Committee reviews all clerkship performance metrics, including CP or Pass grades, professionalism concerns (including attendance, completion of assignments, etc.), cross-clerkship Student Performance Evaluation performance (average of less than Level 2.5 or below), and other course components to identify students who may benefit from additional help and to refer them to the SSIAT for support. SCC may recommend to the ARC Progress Subcommittee specific remediation requirements that students must follow if the committee detects a pattern of two or more pass grades across graded clerkships. The SCC must recommend a student to the SSIAT for a remediation plan if a student does not pass the same NBME exam after two attempts. The ARC will ultimately decide if that remediation is mandatory and if those efforts must be completed prior to a subsequent attempt. Remediation may include additional weeks of clerkship.

The SCC reviews the entire academic record of any student assigned a grade of CP or F to identify the causes for not passing. A grade of F on one or more clerkships may result in failure of the Major Clinical Year. The SCC may recommend to the ARC Progress Subcommittee that a student require remediation or not advance into the next academic phase under the following circumstances during Major Clinical Year: 

  • Failure of a clerkship
  • Failures of 2 or more NBME Subject (Shelf) examinations and/or summative clerkship assessments 
  • Average SPE scores of less than Level 2.5 across clerkships
  • Failure of a USMLE Step 1 Examination 

The ARC Progress Subcommittee may require student completion of a remediation plan targeting deficiencies, repetition of specific clerkships, or repetition of the entire Major Clinical Year. The ARC Progress Subcommittee may recommend to the Dean a student’s suspension or dismissal from the program.

Repetition of an entire clerkship or an entire Major Clinical Year is permitted only once. Students who do not successfully complete an entire clerkship or the entire Major Clinical Year after two attempts may be subject to dismissal from the program by the ARC Progress Subcommittee.  

Differentiation and Integration Phase 

Passing Courses/Electives/D&I Requirements

In order to be approved for graduation, a student must pass all required courses of the D&I phase, including the Scholarly Project requirement, and successfully complete the elective requirements for D&I phase.

The criteria for passing each course or elective are defined by the course director in the official course syllabus and are communicated to students at the beginning of the course.

Students must complete a Scholarly Project that meets the standards outlined in the Capstone Common Document. These standards are reviewed and communicated by each Track Director.

If a student's initial submission does not meet passing standards,
the Track Director will return the Capstone to the student and mentor with specific feedback and required revisions. The student must revise and resubmit the project. The revised Capstone will be reviewed again by the Mentor and Track Director. If the project meets passing standards, the requirement is fulfilled. If the project still does not meet passing standards, the case will be referred to the D&I: Scholarly Projects Program (SPP) Committee for formal review. If the D&I: SPP Committee determines that the project still does not meet passing standards, the student will receive a failing grade.

The SPP Committee will refer the student to the Academic Review Committee (ARC) Progress Subcommittee for further action, including mandated remediation. Timely resolution is critical due to graduation deadlines.

Students who fail to submit their Scholarly Project materials by March 15 will be referred directly to the ARC Progress Subcommittee by the SPP Committee. These students may be subject to a recommendation to delay or halt graduation.

Final Reviews in the D&I Phase

The SCC reviews performance in all required courses (core sub-internships, R4R) and elective courses in the D&I Phase and discusses students with failures and weak elective performances, low cross-clerkship Student Performance Evaluation performance (average of less than Level 3.5 or below), as well as grades of High Pass or Pass (if the course uses tiered grading). If a student fails any of the required or elective courses, the SCC will recommend to the ARC Progress Subcommittee that the student be required to repeat the same course or to undertake a suitable designated academic program of remediation. If a student fails two elective courses, the SCC may determine a failing grade for the senior elective component or for all of the Differentiation and Integration Phase and may make a recommendation of dismissal to the ARC Progress Subcommittee.  

 

The Academic Review Committee Progress Subcommittee may recommend dismissal or delaying graduation until the student has acquired requisite knowledge and skills in programs designated by the SSIAT and monitored SCC.  Following failure of two elective courses or scholarly project, if a student does not successfully complete the remediation program approved by the ARC Progress Subcommittee, that committee may, after thorough consideration of the academic record, move to delay the student’s graduation or for student dismissal.

Repetition of an entire Sub-I, D&I: SPP or the entire D&I curriculum is permitted only once.  Students who do not successfully complete the recommended Sub-I, D&I: SPP, or the entire D&I Phase after two attempts may be subject to dismissal from the program by the ARC.

Feedback to Students 

Course and clerkship directors must provide students with clear statements of objectives and performance expectations in each course within the syllabus as well as links to the appropriate policies regarding student performance such as the standards for professionalism, attendance logging, and course evaluation policies. This may also include suggestions to strengthen performance.

Monitored Academic Status 

Monitored Academic Status (MAS) is an internal designation made by the ARC Progress Subcommittee for students with significant academic difficulty. Students with this designation are notified by the associate dean for student affairs, support, and services when this designation begins and ends. MAS designation means that the SCC will review the student’s academic performance at their regular meetings to further identify any difficulties early. Course directors, the SCC or the SSIAT may recommend tutors, guidance on study skills and or the reduction/elimination of extracurricular activities, and other internal and external resources to improve the student’s learning experience and ensure success. Students on MAS may be restricted from leadership roles in extracurricular activities or might be asked to restrict non-academic activities by the ARC Progress Subcommittee. This designation is not recorded in the Medical Student Performance Evaluation or in the permanent record.  This status is temporary in nature. Appeals are not appropriate for this status for it is an educational status, not an adverse action.

Graduation 

In addition to successfully completing all course requirements in each phase of the curriculum, students are required to pass USMLE Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge exams to be eligible for graduation from VP&S. The full graduation requirements are located in the graduation policy.

Before certifying students for the Doctor of Medicine degree, the SCC will make recommendations to the Academic Review Committee Progress Subcommittee for graduation.  The Academic Review Progress Subcommittee then assures that students have acquired the knowledge, skills, and attitudes essential for the safe assumption of responsibility for patient care in postgraduate education.

Adverse Action Decisions and Appeals Procedure

Students referred to the ARC who are at risk for an impending adverse action decision, either through the Academic Progress Subcommittee or the Academic Infractions Subcommittee, are notified of this impending action in writing within 10 business days. The student is provided with relevant information and is given the opportunity to present in writing or in person any other relevant data, evidence, or information that the student would like to be considered in the deliberation. Any student appearing in person may be accompanied by only either their advisory dean or one VP&S faculty member of their choice.  

Committee members who have a conflict of interest must disclose this to the chair of the ARC and be recused from deliberations and decisions about the student being reviewed. 

A student may appeal an adverse action decision by the Academic Review Committee. The appeal must be made in writing within 7 business days of the time the student is notified of the decision, and it must clearly state the grounds for appeal. Such an appeal should be sent to the Associate Dean of Student Affairs, Support and Services at Vagelos Education Center, Suite 1103. A hearing will be convened which will include the student, who may be accompanied by his/her advisory dean, or one other member of the VP&S faculty. The Associate Dean of Student Affairs, Support and Services and Associate Dean for Student Diversity, Inclusion and Belonging are ex officio members of the committee. The Appeals Committee will consist of individuals who are NOT members of the Academic Review Committee, Student Competency Committees (SCCs) or Course/Clerkship Directors involved in the original decisions. The hearing is held with a representative of the Columbia University Center for Student Success and Intervention (CSSI). If the Committee hearing the appeal reaffirms the original decision, the student may appeal the decision within seven business days of notification to the VP&S Dean of the Faculty of Medicine and/ or their designee. There is no further appeal within the University. 

Policy History/ Approval Date:  

The policy on scheduling electives was taken from print-version student handbooks and online formats prior to 2018. These documents were reformatted and codified into policy where specific procedures and edits were added. Fundamentals Phase Revisions were approved by Curriculum and Education Policy Committee, 10/4/19, the MCY Phase Revision were approved by Curriculum and Education Policy Committee 8/31/18. The Appeals Policy Revision were approved by Curriculum and Education Policy Committee 1/25/19. 

The policy was updated, reviewed and approved by the Committee on Educational Policy and Curriculum on August 16, 2024, and was again updated, reviewed, and approved by the Commitee on Educational Policy and Curriculum on July 18, 2025. Effective date 08/01/2025.