Professional Performance Evaluations (PPEs)
The purpose of the PPE is to record the student's professional ratings and personal disposition for the counseling profession. In addition, the form requires that faculty comment on the student's strengths and weaknesses. A PPE will be completed by each faculty member following the student's completion of a course each term, therefore, a student will receive a PPE for each course taken within the program and may receive multiple PPEs within any given term. It is hoped that the comments generated in this manner will guide the student and will also guide the program in evaluating student progress in a consistent and thorough manner. Whenever possible, faculty are encouraged to recommend areas for further study and/or remediation. Listed below are suggested criteria for student performance professional areas. These criteria are designed to be exemplary and not exhaustive. The aims and design of individual courses will determine in part the criteria that are applicable.
Professional Performance Criteria
In awarding professional performance ratings, faculty will assess the following aspects of a student's performance using a scale of 0-4, whereas 0 indicates "Needs Improvement" and 4 indicates "Outstanding - At a Professional Level".
- Listens to others, cooperates with others
- Accepts others' point of view
- Responds in a self-reflective and self-critical manner to comments about professional and academic performance
- Abides by established ethical standards.
- Shows motivation to master new material and new skills
- Demonstrates self-awareness
- Demonstrates acceptance of cultural and individual differences.
- Tolerates ambiguity that is inherent in the field of mental health.
- Demonstrates critical thinking and healthy skepticism.
- Recognizes the rights and responsibilities of counselors as well as other professionals.
- Demonstrates development of professional identity as a counselor
The University calculates cumulative grade point averages by assigning quality points to respective grades as follows:
||Quality Points Per Credit
||Quality Points Per Credit
Grade point averages are computed by dividing the total quality points earned by the number of graded credits attempted. Grades of Withdraw (W), Pass (P), and Incomplete (I) are not included in the calculations.
All faculty members submit final grades to the Registrar's Office by the date designated each term by the Doane University Registrar. Final grades will not be submitted before the fourth (4rd) week of any term.
Grade Review Procedure
If a student has questions about the fairness or appropriateness of a grade she/he has received, they must first discuss the matter with their instructor(s). If the matter is not resolved during these discussions, the student may request that the Program Director review the matter. The Program Director will discuss the problem with the faculty member(s) and student and, subject to the limited criteria set forth in the grievance procedure outlined elsewhere in this handbook, may make appropriate recommendations. However, the faculty member(s) retains the final authority regarding course grades.
Should the student not agree with the recommendations of the Program Director then they may petition the Program Director. The Dean of the college will review all correspondence and materials. The Dean will then meet with the faculty member, Program Director, and student to discuss the matter. The Dean will then, in accordance with the limited grievance policy outlined elsewhere in this handbook, may make recommendations.
The following steps must be taken to appeal a grade:
1. Student must initiate the appeal process, within 10 days of award of the grade, with a written request to the course instructor(s) for a meeting to discuss their concern(s). A copy of the letter must be sent to the Program Director.
2. Course instructor(s) must meet with the student to attempt to resolve the appeal. If the complaint is not resolved during this meeting, the student may request a conference with the Program Director. The request must be in writing, and must state the grounds upon which the student is basing the appeal.
3. The Program Director will request information on the appeal from both the student and instructor(s), and will meet with the student to discuss the appeal. On the basis of the information presented by both, and a meeting with the student, the Program Director will determine if more action is warranted.
Monitoring of Student Performance
In order to promote an optimal educational experience, the following procedures are used to foster appropriate communication between the University, students, and advisers:
- Every term, the Registrar reviews the student's academic performance, and the student is notified if they have a grade below B or a GPA below 3.00. The Program Director and the SSPRC review PPEs. The student is notified if they have received a PPE below 3.
- Each term a review of progress is held by the SSPRC. Eligible faculty reviews the knowledge, skills, attitudes and dispositions of students for promotion. The review includes academic performance, clinical skills, basic competency demonstration, and professional performance evaluations to date. The purpose of this review is to ensure that each student's progress is carefully monitored, that faculty are informed as to the progress of all students, and that students are informed as to their performance and standing in the program. In addition, the committee reviews students' requests for promotion. The overall assessment of the SSPRC, along with any specific recommendations or requirements, are communicated to students in writing and/or by their PID instructor and/or the Program Director.
Students may receive a letter granting them full admission to the program, promoting them from one level to another, acknowledging and commending strengths, or identifying deficiencies or issues to be addressed. If the student has received a PPE of less than 3 they will need to develop a remediation plan in collaboration with their faculty member(s). The remediation plan will be submitted to the Program Director.
Disciplinary issues may be addressed through a remediation plan developed by the SSPRC or referred to the Program Director when questions are raised about a student's academic, professional, or personal performance. These include a student's demonstrated knowledge, technical and interpersonal skills, personal and professional attitudes, and professional demeanor. Reasons for a remediation plan developed by the SSPRC and/or referral to the Program Director for disciplinary action include, but are not limited to:
- Failing a course.
- Receiving two grades of B- or lower.
- Receiving a single Professional Performance Evaluation of 2 or 1.
- Having a cumulative grade point average of less than 3.00.
- Personal unsuitability for the counseling profession.
- Failing a practicum.
- Failing an internship.
- Engaging in unethical behavior.
- Unprofessional social media presence.
- Unsuccessful demonstration of competency through portfolio development.
After an evaluation process, which may include reviewing records and relevant information, meeting with the student, and consulting with the student's PID instructor, the SSPRC may recommend intervention and sanctions. Possible interventions and sanctions include, but are not limited to, developing a plan for remedial work in conjunction with the student's PID instructor, placing a student on probation, requiring an additional practicum or internship, or dismissing a student. The student shall agree in writing to the recommendations developed by the SSPRC within 15 days after being notified of the Committee's decision, or file a written notice of appeal with the Program Director, or be subject to further action. If a student files a written notice of appeal with the Program Director, the appeal will be subject to the Grievance procedure described elsewhere in this Handbook.
Professional or Academic Probation and Dismissal
A student may be placed on Professional or Academic Probation for two terms or a time frame deemed appropriate by the Program Director and/or in conjunction with the SSPRC. The SSPRC and the Program Director will closely monitor a student's academic status while on probation. Failure to return to good standing after this period will result in immediate dismissal from the program.
A student is subject to immediate dismissal from the program for violation of professional ethics or of the Doane University academic integrity policy, or other reasons as noted above, or determined by the Program Director. A decision of the Program Director regarding discipline may not be negotiated. However, under the limited criteria set forth in the grievance procedures, a student may request a formal grievance hearing if the grievance meets the grievance criteria as listed in the section Grievance.
Student Counseling Promotion Portfolio
Students will be required to keep and submit a portfolio to the SSPRC prior to each promotion. The purpose of the portfolio is to provide students with a place to gather artifacts and reflections on learning. This allows the counseling student to demonstrate mastery in the relevant domains of the counseling profession. The portfolio is a repository for artifacts and serves as an assessment tool to evaluate each student's progress at periodic benchmarks and provide feedback. Prior to promotion to the next-level students will demonstrate competency in each curriculum area assigned to that program level.
Student portfolios must be sent for review to all full-time faculty and the student's PID instructor by the fourth week of the term in which the student is eligible to promote. Portfolios are due no later than the Friday of the fourth week of the term by 11:59pm. Portfolios submitted or changed after the deadline will not be eligible for review and promotion will be denied.
All full-time faculty and the student's PID instructor will review student portfolios submitted in a timely manner. Any student receiving a 1 (beginner) or 2 (developing) in any area of the portfolio by a majority of full-time faculty and the student's PID instructor will be denied promotion unless promoted by the SSPRC. Students who receive a 3 (proficient) or 4 (advanced) in all areas of the portfolio from full-time faculty and their PID instructor will be evaluated by the SSPRC for discussion of promotion. Those students receiving mixed reviews in areas of their portfolio (e.g. not a majority of 3 or 4, nor a majority of 1 or 2) will be brought before the SSPRC for discussion for promotion.
Students may submit their portfolio for promotion when they are enrolled in the final course at their current program level. Students who are denied promotion will be placed on probationary status and will not be eligible to enroll in any new courses the following term unless approved by the SSPRC. Students denied promotion will receive feedback on areas of the portfolio that have deficiencies or that need improvements. Students may then resubmit their request for promotion the following term. Students who resubmit their portfolio for promotion a second time and again receives a majority of 1 (beginner) and 2 (developing) will be dismissed from the program.
Student Screening and Progress Review Committee
The SSPRC meets once each term to review students' progress and make recommendations for students submitting a request for promotion. Additionally, the committee will discuss other students that the faculty identifies as needing additional support. These students could include those who have failed a class, have received a two or below on any section of a PPE, have been reported to behave in an unprofessional or unethical manner, or other students deemed by the Program Director as needing to be reviewed based on extenuating circumstances.
The committee will review promotion materials submitted by students and discuss recommendations made based on these materials from the Program Director, PID instructor, and full-time faculty. A recommendation of granting promotion, remediation, probation, suspension, or dismissal for the program will be made for each student discussed by the committee.