4.1 Student Early Intervention Process (SEIP)
The SEIP is the process by which students who are experiencing professionalism or academic difficulty or at risk of professionalism or academic difficulty are identified. The goal of SEIP is to ensure students are being referred to and are using the available resources (tutoring, coaching, advising) and have been notified when there are patterns of concern.
4.1.1 The Student Early Intervention Committee (SEIC)
Student Early Intervention Committee (SEIC) Operating Procedure
SEICs are medical school committees that monitor student progression through the curriculum and identify students who are at academic or professionalism risk. The Medical Education and Student Affairs Offices in collaboration with course and clerkship directors are responsible for identifying students who are struggling to meet the academic and professionalism standards and thus progress through medical school as expected.
SEIC recommendations are intended to notify students of identified concerns and to provide suggested or required support and remediation to ensure successful and timely progression through the curriculum. SEIC recommendations will be fed forward to AME core advisers and Student Affairs Deans to provide support for the student. SEPC reviews all SEIC recommendations.
Committee Members
The Preclerkship Phase SEIC (M1 and M2), chaired by the PCS chair, comprises the PCS Chair, course directors and course managers for academic years 1 and 2, the Associate Dean of Medical Education (ADME), Associate Dean of Student Affairs (ADSA), Director and Administrative Manager of the Coaching Program and Director of the Academic Enhancement Office (AEO) and the Registrar. The SEIC meets quarterly and reviews all students.
The Clerkship and Post Clerkship Phase SEIC (M3 and M4), chaired by the CCS chair, comprises all of the Clerkship directors, 2 departmental M4 directors (who may have dual roles as clerkship directors), 1 sub-internship director, the ADME, and the ADSA, Director and Administrative Manager of the Coaching Program, the AEO director, and the Registrar. This committee meets quarterly and reviews all students. All fourth years are reviewed at the start of the M4 year and then once mid year.
All members of the SEIC will be listed on a website linked from MEO and SAO.
SEIC Academic or Professionalism Criteria to Identify Students at Risk
The Student Early Intervention Committee (SEIC) referral tables for the preclerkship (APPENDIX 1) and clerkship phases (APPENDIX 2) explain how the medical school identifies and responds when a student is having academic or professionalism difficulties. The tables are designed to help students receive feedback, support, and opportunities to improve early, while also making clear when repeated or unresolved concerns may need additional review by the Student Evaluation and Promotion Committee (SEPC)
Depending on the concern, the framework may call for direct feedback, a required meeting with the course director, tutoring, academic enhancement, coaching, a meeting with an associate dean, or a written SEIC professionalism notification
The table identifies when concerns require documentation and when the student must receive notice. When SEPC referral criterion is met, the course director or course manager notifies the Associate Dean of Medical Education, who provides written notice to the student.
SEIC Potential Recommendations to Students
Recommendations may include required meetings with faculty, individual and group tutoring, office hours, coaching and meeting with Academic Enhancement Office specialists, meeting with an Associate Dean, advisor or coach and/or other actions such as a formal professionalism notification and referral to the Student Evaluation and Promotion Committee (SEPC). SEPC will be notified of all SEIC recommendations.
SEIC Referral to SEPC
The SEIC can require students with significant or repeated academic or professionalism concerns to meet with the Student Evaluation and Promotion Committee (SEPC) for additional review.
The Student Early Intervention Committee (SEIC) referral tables identify specific circumstances that require escalation to SEPC(APPENDICES 1 and 2). These include repeated Learning Progress Assessment failures, multiple final course or block failures, failure of a remediation examination, multiple Doctoring Module Assessment failures, two or more written SEIC professionalism notifications, failure to meet SEIC recommendations after written notification, continuing professionalism concerns after a previous SEPC review, and failure to meet requirements established through an earlier SEPC decision.
SEIC Notifications to Student
There are two notifications that can result from SEIC. The first is a letter of academic concern and the second is a letter of professionalism concern. Example letters to students are listed below.
1. Letter of Academic Concern Example
A Letter of Academic Concern will be shared with the student via the SEIC email drafted and signed by the SEIC chair on behalf of the SEIC with the subject line: Academic Concern Notification, with a copy to the chair of SEPC. The text of the email will be:
Dear student X,
I am writing to notify you that on a date here a review of your academic and professionalism record by the Student Early Intervention Committee identified your performance as a significant academic concern.
The committee discussed the following concerns during the meeting: XX reasons for the letter of concern
The committee has recommended the following: XXX
Your SAO dean and adviser will also be notified. You are required to meet with the SAO to review the recommendations. Please email the ADME Dean if you have any further questions regarding this notification.
2. Letter of Professionalism Concern Example
A Letter of Professionalism Concern will be shared with the student via SEIC email drafted and signed by the chair of the SEIC on behalf of the SEIC with the subject line: Professionalism Concern Notification, with a copy to the chair of SEPC. The text of the email will be as follows:
Dear Student X,
I am writing to notify you that on date here a review of your academic and professionalism record by the Student Early Intervention Committee identified your performance as a significant professionalism concern.
The committee discussed the following concerns during the meeting: XX reasons for the letter of concern.
The committee has recommended the following: XX
Your SAO dean and adviser will also be notified and you are required to meet with the SAO to review the recommendations. Please email the ADSA if you have any further questions regarding this notification.
3. SEPC Letter Referral Example
Dear XXX
I am writing to notify you that on date here a review of your academic and professionalism record, by the Student Early Intervention Committee identified your performance as a significant academic concern.
The SEIC has referred you to the Student Evaluation and Promotions Committee (SEPC).
The reasons for this referral include XX
Your SAO dean will also be notified and you are required to meet with the SAO to discuss the meeting. Your advisor, the registrar and the chair of SEPC have also been cc’d. Please email the ADSA if you have any further questions regarding this notification.
4.1.2 SEIC to SEPC Referral Process
- SEIC identifies students of concern
- The ADME or designee emails SEPC committee manager with the list of names for the SEPC meeting, including name of student, year, and reason for SEPC referral.
- The ADME notifies the students that they have been identified as a student of concern and are being referred to SEPC
- The ADSA and ADME discuss optimal timing for the student’s appearance at the SEPC (e.g., which meeting, taking into account their academic schedule, scheduled exams, personal concerns).
- The SEPC committee manager notifies the students via email that they have been placed on the SEPC agenda by the SEIC at least three business days prior to the SEPC meeting, including the reason for the referral to the SEPC.
4.2 Student Evaluation and Promotion Committee (SEPC)
The role of the Student Evaluation and Promotion Committee (SEPC) in accordance with Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine policies and standards, the SEPC evaluates a student’s academic and professional body of work, and makes recommendations in the best interest of academic progression and patient care;
SEPC roles includes: 1) Considering student petitions for exception to school policy, 2) holistically reviewing students who are not meeting the competency standards and failing to progress through the curriculum as expected 3) determining appropriate actions for any student referred for academic or professionalism concerns including additional requirements and expectations for the student 4) determine students’ readiness for promotion from one phase of the curriculum to the next or graduation.
SEPC decisions are based upon the student’s entire academic and disciplinary record, if any, at the time of the meeting. SEPC will make decisions based on a holistic review of the student to ensure that progression and promotion through the curriculum are appropriate. SEPC actions may include, but are not limited to:
- Required tutoring, academic enhancement meetings, coaching, course work remediation
- Repeating the year
- a Decelerated Curriculum or a LOA
- Professionalism concern documentation in MSPE
- Probation for a defined period
- Suspension for a defined period of one semester or more
- Referral to Physician Health Services for further assessment or monitoring
- Dismissal from the medical school.
4.2.1 Composition
The Composition of the SEPC is outlined in Article 5, Section G5 of the Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine Bylaws at: https://www.bumc.bu.edu/camed/offices-services/office-of-the-dean/camed-bylaws/. Quorum is defined as >50% of the voting members.
4.2.2 Recusal and Conflict of Interest
Any faculty who has identified a conflict of interest with the student being reviewed may recuse themselves from the meeting and decision making regarding the student. Faculty must recuse themselves if: 1) If they are a course/clerkship director who has taken an action such as awarding a failing grade that contributes to the adverse action being proposed against a student. 2) If they are the student’s current course or clerkship director 3)Faculty who have provided health care to the student being reviewed or 4) Faculty who are a member of the student’s family.
4.2.3 Expedited Procedures
The SEPC Chair, after discussion with the Associate Dean of Student Affairs, may, in place of a formal meeting, email SEPC members to request approval of a student’s petition. SEPC members may approve the petition or request a meeting for resolution. In addition, the Associate Dean of Student Affairs may act on petitions from students who are in good academic standing without previous lapses in professional conduct or previous appearances before the SEPC. Such actions may include approving or denying petitions:
- for a Leave of Absence (LOA) for personal reasons;
- for a medical LOA;
- to enter a Modified curriculum; and
- to return to the curriculum from a LOA.
4.2.4 Student Generated Petitions
All student petitions must be prepared in consultation with the Associate Dean of Student Affairs (or designee) and must comply with the rules established by the Faculty of Medicine governing evaluation, grading, and promotion. All petitions must be typed, dated, signed, addressed to the SEPC, and received by the Office of Student Affairs at least three (3) business days before the scheduled meeting, unless an emergency prevents the student from complying with the deadline.
4.2.5 Procedure
The SEPC meets monthly, or as necessary, to assess student readiness for evaluation and promotion for all four years of MD curriculum.
All students on the SEPC’s agenda will be notified by email of the date, time, and location of the meeting at least THREE business days prior to the meeting. Students will be informed of the right to appear at the meeting and/or to submit a written statement to the SEPC. A student is not required, but is strongly encouraged, to attend the meeting. Within 24 hours of notification, a student must contact the appropriate Student Affairs officer to indicate whether or not the student will attend. If a student does not respond, the meeting date will be held as planned, with or without the student present.
A student may bring a faculty advisor to the SEPC meeting. The advisor may present information to the SEPC but will not participate in the general discussion about the student. Neither the student nor the advisor may be present during discussion, deliberation, or voting on the petition. Attorneys are not permitted to attend SEPC meetings.
Records and other documents (e.g emails) relating to a student on the SEPC’s meeting agenda are available to Committee members prior to or at the meeting. Upon request, the student will have the opportunity to review in advance all documents to be submitted to the Committee. The student should have the opportunity to discuss adverse reports or evaluations with the appropriate Course Director, Clerkship Director, or Rotation Director before the SEPC acts on any reports or evaluations.
The Chair will communicate the SEPC’s decision to the student in writing within 10 business days.
Students can only appeal decisions made by SEPC in a formal letter. A student who plans to appeal the SEPC’s decision and notifies the Registrar in writing of their intent to appeal, may remain registered and participate in courses or clerkships during the appeals process until they either miss the deadline for the next appeal or the Dean upholds the SEPC decision. No course or clerkship grades obtained during the appeal period will be recorded on the student’s medical school transcript if the SEPC decision is upheld. Students are responsible for tuition charges during this period.
4.2.6 Disciplinary Proceedings Reports to the SEPC
When a student in the MD or any of the combined MD programs has been found responsible for violating any disciplinary code of academic or professional conduct of the University, the SEPC shall be notified of the University’s final determination. The SEPC may review the final decision and the student’s complete academic record and may determine if other action is appropriate. If a student in a combined degree program is brought to the respective promotions or disciplinary committee, the SEPC shall be notified.
4.2.7 Committee Records Retention
Records of all SEPC meetings, as well as meetings of the Committee on Appeals, will be kept for six (6) years after the graduation or separation of the students on the agenda.
4.3 Committee on Appeals
4.3.1 Composition
The composition of the Committee on Appeals is outlined in Article 5, Section G7 of the Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine Bylaws at: www.bumc.bu.edu/camed/offices-services/office-of-the-dean/camed-bylaws/. A committee member who may have a conflict of interest in a particular case, such as having served as the student’s advisor, personal physician, or is the director of a course/clerkship being discussed, shall be recused from that student’s case. Quorum is defined as >50% of the voting members in attendance for any Appeals decisions.
4.3.2 Recusal and Conflict of Interest
Any faculty who has identified a conflict of interest with the student being reviewed may recuse themselves from the meeting and decision making regarding the student. Faculty must recuse themselves if: 1) If they are a course/clerkship director who has taken an action such as awarding a failing grade that contributes to the adverse action being proposed against a student. 2)Clinical faculty who have provided health care to the student being reviewed or are a member of the student’s family.
4.3.3 Procedures
Appeals must be submitted in writing within ten (10) business days after a student receives written notice of a SEPC decision. The Associate Dean of Student Affairs may grant an extension of the filing deadline if requested within the 10 day period. The Committee on Appeals will hear any appeal of a SEPC decision and take such action as it finds appropriate with respect to the original decision.
Students may elect to appear before the Committee on Appeals alone or accompanied by a faculty advisor. The advisor may present information to the committee but will not participate in the general discussion about the student. Neither the student nor the advisor may be present during discussion, deliberation, or voting on the appeal. Attorneys are not permitted to attend meetings of the Committee on Appeals. If a student, referred to Physician Health Services (PHS) by the SEPC, chooses to appeal PHS’ determinations, the student must sign an unrestricted release of information, allowing PHS to share information with the Appeals Committee.
The Chair of the Committee on Appeals is responsible for obtaining all relevant information from the appropriate Associate Deans, Registrar and the SEPC chair via email or in-person and share it with the committee at least 24 hours before the meeting date.
The recommendations of the Committee on Appeals should comply with the Policies and Procedures for Evaluation, Grading, and Promotion of Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine MD Students. The Committee on Appeals may grant or deny a student’s appeal, or may modify the SEPC’s decision.
The Chair of the Committee on Appeals will communicate the Committee’s decision to the student in writing, within ten business days.
The Committee on Appeals will report all decisions to the Dean of the School of Medicine.
4.3.4 Additional Appeals
A student may submit a written appeal to the Dean of the School of Medicine within ten (10) business days after receipt of the written decision of the Committee on Appeals. The Dean may affirm, modify, or reverse the decision, or remand matters to the Committee on Appeals or the SEPC for reconsideration, and will communicate the decision and rationale to the student in writing. The Dean’s decision is final.