Due Process Procedure for Dismissal (or Sanction) based on Non-Academic Performance

• When, in the judgment of a faculty member or a student colleague, a student’s behavior constitutes conduct of a nature that warrants dismissal (or sanction) as outlined in the School’s Technical Standards and/or Non-Academic Progression Standards, the faculty member or student colleague shall so notify the Chair of the Scholastic Achievement and Progression Committee and the Director of the Office of Student Affairs in
• The Chair of the Scholastic Achievement and Progression Committee and/or Director of OSA will then notify the student and the faculty member or student colleague in writing within two weeks of the request as to the time and place for the Scholastic Achievement and Progression Committee hearing to determine whether, in the Committee’s judgment the dismissal (or sanction) is A minimum of 72 hours notification will be given for the hearing.
• The Committee will hold a closed hearing at which the faculty member or student colleague may be present and provide oral or written evidence regarding the behavior that in the faculty member’s or student colleague’s judgment is grounds for dismissal (or sanction). The student may be present and given an opportunity to provide oral or written evidence regarding his/her behavior. The evidentiary proceedings will be Support persons, including legal counsel and parents/guardians, cannot participate in the hearing process. Failure of the student to participate or be present, will not stop the proceedings of the Committee.
• Following the evidentiary presentation, the Committee will convene in executive session to determine whether dismissal or other sanctions/recommendations are warranted.
• The Committee shall make its decision known in writing to the Executive Vice Dean – Chief Academic Officer, the student, and the person initiating the charge.

Note: Some student conduct may be both an unsafe or unprofessional pharmacy practice and an offense under the Instrument of Student Judicial Governance. In such a case, the matter will be referred first to the pharmacy student attorney general. If the pharmacy student attorney general determines that the alleged behavior does not constitute an offense under the Instrument, the School of Pharmacy will proceed under this Policy for Non-Academic Progression. If the pharmacy student attorney general determines that the alleged behavior constitutes an offense under the Instrument and that there is sufficient evidence to charge the student with an offense, the case will be heard by the Pharmacy Honor Court. If the Honor Court finds the student guilty of behavior that would also call the student’s professional fitness into question, the School of Pharmacy will consider the behavior under this Policy for Non-Academic Progression. However, if the pharmacy student attorney general determines that the alleged behavior would constitute an offense under the Instrument but that there is insufficient evidence to charge the student, the matter will not be considered under this Policy for Non-Academic Progression. Similarly, if the student is charged but the Honor Court finds the student not guilty, the matter will not be considered further under this Policy for Non-Academic Progression.