Resident-Fellow Discipline & Dismissal Policy

Policy Owner: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs

Policy Contact: Assistant Dean for Advanced Education

POLICY STATEMENT

Trainees are expected to maintain appropriate standards of academic and non-academic behavior. If these standards are not met, trainees can be disciplined for both academic and non-academic reasons. Forms of discipline include, but are not limited to: formal warning, required compliance, probation, suspension, and dismissal. There are separate grounds and processes for each type of discipline.

I. Program Director Responsibilities

The Program Director has primary responsibility for monitoring the academic performance, competency, and professionalism of the trainees in their training program. The Program Director may appoint the Department Chair, Division Director, or any full-time faculty member of the program as their designee. If discipline or dismissal from the program is warranted, it is the Program Director’s responsibility to follow School of Dentistry policies in all aspects of discipline or dismissal.

The specific actions of formal warning, probation, suspension, and dismissal must follow the process outlined below. In the event of disciplinary action, the Program Director must notify the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education.

II. Remediation/Discipline for Academic Reasons

a. Grounds

As students, trainees are required to maintain satisfactory academic performance. Academic performance that is below satisfactory is grounds for mandated remediation or discipline. Below satisfactory academic performance is defined as a failed rotation; relevant exam scores below program requirements; and/or unsatisfactory performance, as evidenced by faculty evaluations and other assessments, in the areas of didactic knowledge, clinical diagnosis and judgment, technical abilities, interpretation of data, patient management, communication skills, interactions with patients and other healthcare professionals, professionalism, and/or motivation and initiative.

To maintain satisfactory academic performance, trainees also must meet all eligibility requirements throughout the training program. Failure or inability to satisfy licensure, registration, fitness/availability for work, visa, immunization, mandatory training, or other program-specific eligibility requirements are grounds for dismissal from the program.

b. Process

Before disciplining or dismissing a trainee for academic reasons, the program must give the trainee:

• Notice of performance deficiencies;
• An opportunity to remedy the deficiencies; and
• Notice of the possibility of dismissal if the deficiencies are not corrected.

Typically, the steps involved in discipline of a trainee for academic reasons include one or all of the following: formal warning, probation, and dismissal. These steps should follow this standard progressive order, but specific steps can be skipped if deemed necessary or the infraction is deemed severe enough to justify such action.

Formal Warning/Notice of Deficiencies

A formal verbal or written warning may be issued to trainees for unsatisfactory academic performance. The formal warning is issued by the Program Director. The warning should include a clear description of the performance deficiencies that caused the warning, references to previous discussions, if any, as well as the program’s expectations for improvement. A written record of the date and content of the warning shall be maintained in the trainee’s academic file.

Probation

Trainees who demonstrate a pattern of unsatisfactory academic performance may be placed on probation. The probation notification is issued to the trainee in writing by the Program Director after consultation with the program faculty. The purpose of probation is to give the trainee specific notice of performance deficiencies and an opportunity to correct those deficiencies. The length of the probationary period may vary, but it must be specified at the outset and be of sufficient duration to give the trainee a meaningful opportunity to remedy the identified performance deficiencies. Depending on the trainee’s performance during probation, the possible outcomes of the probationary period are: removal from probation with a return to good academic standing; continued probation with new or remaining deficiencies cited; or dismissal from the program.

Dismissal

Dismissing a trainee from their program is the final step of the disciplinary process and should not be taken lightly. Dismissal prior to the conclusion of a probationary period may occur if other, non-academic grounds for dismissal exist. Dismissal at the end of a probationary period may occur if the trainee’s academic deficiencies are not successfully remediated. If the program director, in consultation with the program faculty who evaluated the trainee’s performance during the probationary period, determines that the trainee should be dismissed from the program, the final determination as to whether the trainee should be dismissed shall be made by an ad hoc committee consisting of five full-time advanced education faculty appointed by the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education. The faculty members of this committee must hold appointments in a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. If deemed to be of benefit, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education may also appoint a trainee as a non-voting member to assist the committee in deliberations. The trainee member would also be from a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. A faculty chair of the committee will be appointed by the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education shall be present during committee deliberations as a non-voting member to assist the committee chair in managing the process and to ensure procedural consistency.

Trainees disciplined and/or dismissed for academic reasons may initiate a grievance process through the Conflict Resolution Process for Student Academic Complaints Policy. This grievance process is not intended as a substitute for the academic judgments of the faculty who have evaluated the performance of the trainee, but rather is based on a claimed violation of a rule, policy, or established practice of the University or its programs.

III. Discipline for Non-Academic Reasons

a. Grounds

Grounds for discipline and/or dismissal of a trainee for non-academic reasons include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Failure to comply with the bylaws, policies, rules, or regulations of the University of Minnesota, affiliated clinics and hospitals, department, or with the terms and conditions of the trainee's residency/fellowship agreement.
• Commission by the trainee of an offense under federal, state, or local laws or ordinances, which affects the abilities of the trainee to appropriately perform their normal duties in the training program.
• Conduct that violates professional and/or ethical standards; disrupts the operations of the University, its departments, or affiliated clinics and hospitals; or disregards the rights or welfare of patients, visitors, students, clinical/hospital staff, or others involved in the training program.

b. Process

In order to assure due process, prior to the imposition of any discipline for non-academic reasons, a trainee shall be afforded:

• Clear and actual notice by the appropriate University, school, department, or program representative of charges that may result in discipline, including the specific nature of the allegations; and,
• An opportunity for the trainee to appear in person to respond to the allegations.

If a trainee’s conduct is grossly unprofessional, incompetent, erratic, potentially criminal, or reasonably likely to threaten the safety or welfare of patients, visitors, clinical/hospital staff, or the trainee themselves, the University of Minnesota, an affiliated clinic or hospital, and the department or program of the trainee each has a right to impose suspension upon a trainee. Immediate suspensions should be limited to situations where there is an issue that could impact the safety and wellbeing of members of the University community (including patients), to ensure the trainee’s own physical and emotional safety and wellbeing, or if the trainee poses an ongoing threat of disrupting or interfering with the operations of the University. In those cases, the trainee may avail themselves of the hearing procedures described below.

During the suspension, significant effort will be made to ensure a prompt hearing with an ad hoc committee as outlined below to evaluate whether the suspension remains in effect and the impact the suspension has on their academic standing and progress.

c. Determination of Discipline

When discipline of a trainee for non-academic reasons is considered, the Program Director may propose a discipline appropriate to the charges: formal warning, probation, or dismissal. Following the appearance by the trainee, a determination should be made as to whether reasonable grounds exist to validate the proposed discipline and whether it should be imposed. The determination will be made by an ad hoc committee consisting of five full-time advanced education faculty appointed by the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education. The faculty members of this committee must hold appointments in a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. If deemed to be of benefit, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education may also appoint a trainee as a non-voting member to assist the committee in deliberations. The trainee member would also be from a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. A faculty chair of the committee will be appointed by the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education shall be present during committee deliberations as a non-voting member to assist the committee chair in managing the process and to ensure procedural consistency. A written statement of the discipline and the reasons for imposition, including specific charges, witnesses, and applicable evidence shall be presented to the trainee.

After the imposition of any discipline for non-academic reasons, a trainee may request in writing to the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education a hearing to challenge the discipline. If the hearing is requested within thirty (30) calendar days following the effective date of the discipline, a prompt hearing shall be scheduled. If the trainee fails to request a hearing within the thirty (30) day time period, their rights pursuant to this procedure shall be deemed to be waived. Hearings will be conducted following the School of Dentistry Code of Conduct Hearing Rules of Procedure.

A trainee who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Hearing Board may file an appeal with the appellate officer according to the Administrative Procedure Student Conduct Code Procedures: Twin Cities.

Although the discipline will be implemented on the effective date, the stipend of the trainee shall be continued until an appeal has been finalized, the trainee’s appeal rights expire (30 days after the Hearing Board issues its decision), or the termination date of the agreement, whichever occurs first.

REASON FOR POLICY

To provide a framework for disciplining or dismissing trainees whose performance does not meet academic or non-academic standards.

PROCEDURES

Introduction and Purpose

This procedure implements Academic Policy: Resident/Fellow Discipline and Dismissal and explains the process for disciplinary actions initiated against trainees who fall short of the expectations set for them by the School of Dentistry.

The School of Dentistry expects all trainees to fulfill their responsibilities and conduct themselves in a competent, professional manner, and to follow the rules, regulations and policies of the University of Minnesota and affiliated hospitals, as well as federal and state law. In the event a trainee falls short of these expectations, and/or engages in misconduct, violates rules, or fails to satisfactorily perform in the training program, the trainee can be disciplined for their actions or inactions.

Trainees can be disciplined for both academic and non-academic reasons. Forms of discipline include formal warning, probation, and dismissal. There are separate procedures for each type of discipline.

Disciplining or Dismissing a Resident/Fellow for Academic Reasons

Formal Warning

1. The Program Director assembles documentation and examples of the trainee’s academic deficiencies. It must be ensured that academic due process is followed, including adherence to FERPA, Title IX, and professional confidentiality.
2. When warranted, the Program Director determines a remediation plan to address deficiencies with the learner, seeking to improve the highest need first. The remediation plan should include metrics to measure success where applicable.
3. The Program Director generates and signs a formal written warning. The warning should include a clear description of the performance deficiencies that caused the warning, references to previous discussions, if any, as well as the program’s expectations for improvement.
4. The Program Director issues the formal written warning to the trainee.
5. The Program Coordinator keeps a written record of the date and content of the warning in the trainee’s academic file.
6. The trainee follows the remediation plan included in the written warning.
7. At the end of the timeframe established in the formal written warning, the Program Director determines, with the consent of a majority of the program full-time faculty, if the remediation is sufficient or if additional disciplinary action is required. The Program Director then acts on one of the following:
   1. Remove the trainee from formal warning status and return to good standing;
   2. Extend the formal warning period; or
   3. Place the trainee in probationary status.
8. The Program Director meets with the trainee to communicate and document if the remediation is sufficient or if additional disciplinary action is required.

Probation

1. The Program Director assembles documentation and examples of the trainee’s academic deficiencies. It must be ensured that academic due process is followed, including adherence to FERPA, Title IX, and professional confidentiality.
2. The Program Director consults with the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education on the trainee’s issues and the plan before placing a trainee on probation.
3. The Program Director generates and signs a probation letter that documents the areas of concern, improvement(s) that must be achieved during the probation period, and the length of the probationary period. Measurable goals must be included. The probation letter must inform the trainee what action(s) may be taken if the stated improvements are not met in the established time frame. This level of intervention is reportable for credentialing and on the trainee’s academic record. A probation period occurring during training will be noted in all letters of reference. It is highly recommended that Program Directors involve the Office of General Counsel when drafting the probation letter. The Program Director should copy the Dean, Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs on the letter.
4. The Program Director issues the probation letter to the trainee.
5. The Program Coordinator keeps a copy of the probation letter in the trainee’s academic file.
6. The trainee chooses, within five (5) business days, one of the following actions:
   1. Accept the probation and follow the remediation plan included in the probation document; or
   2. Resign from the program if the option is offered.
7. Trainees who wish to resign before completing their training program must give at least a 30-day notice unless an exception is made by the Program Director, who must notify the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education in writing. Notice must be given in writing to the Program Director. All conditions of appointment will terminate on the effective date of the resignation.
8. At the end of the timeframe established in the probation letter, the Program Director determines, with the consent of a majority of the program full-time faculty, if the remediation is sufficient or if additional disciplinary action is required. The Program Director then acts on one of the following:
   1. Remove the trainee from probation with a return to good academic standing;
   2. Continue the probation with new or remaining deficiencies cited; or
   3. Dismiss the trainee from the program.
9. The Program Director issues a letter with the notification of the outcome and next steps to the trainee. If the decision is to move to dismissal, the Program Director moves to this next step.

Dismissal

1. If the Program Director, with the consent of a majority of the program faculty who evaluated the trainee’s performance during the probationary period, determines that the trainee’s academic deficiencies were not successfully remediated and the trainee should be dismissed from the program, the final determination as to whether the trainee should be dismissed shall be made by an ad hoc committee consisting of five full-time advanced education faculty appointed by the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education.
2. The Program Director assembles documentation and examples of the trainee’s remaining academic deficiencies and how the conditions of probation or expected progress have not been met. It must be ensured that academic due process is followed, including adherence to FERPA, Title IX, and professional confidentiality.
3. The Program Director discusses with the Assistant Dean for Advanced their intention to dismiss the trainee from their program and consults with the Office of General Counsel regarding a potential severance agreement.
4. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education assembles an ad hoc committee consisting of five full-time advanced education faculty. The faculty members of this committee must hold appointments in a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. If deemed to be of benefit, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education may also appoint a trainee as a non-voting member to assist the committee in deliberations. The trainee member would also be from a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education appoints a faculty chair of the committee and assists the committee chair in managing the process and ensuring procedural consistency. Panel deliberations and decision shall follow section H of the Campus Committee on Student Behavior Hearing Procedures - Twin Cities.
5. If the ad hoc committee determines that the trainee met the expectations set forth in the probation letter and dismissal is not warranted, the Program Director works with the Office of Academic Affairs to prepare a letter with new guidance on how to be removed from probation. If the ad hoc committee determines that the trainee did not meet the expectations set forth in the probation letter and should be dismissed, the Program Director works with the Office of Academic Affairs and the Office of the General Counsel to prepare a dismissal letter. This letter must document the areas of concern and where the trainee failed to make necessary changes. This level of intervention must be disclosed in credentialing requests for information and on the trainee’s academic record.
6. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs issues the dismissal letter and any relevant policies to the trainee. The letter should inform the trainee whether resignation is an option, and that they could officially appeal the dismissal. The Associate Dean for Academic Affairs should copy the Dean, Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, and Program Director on the letter.
7. The Program Coordinator keeps a copy of the dismissal letter in the trainee’s academic file and notifies appropriate departments (e.g., Human Resources, Payroll, etc.) of the dismissal.
8. The trainee chooses, within thirty (30) calendar days, one of the following actions:
9. Accept the dismissal;
10. Resign from the program if the option is offered; or
11. Initiate a grievance process through the Conflict Resolution Process for Student Academic Complaints Policy.

Disciplining or Dismissing a Resident/Fellow for Non-academic Reasons

Discipline Based on Misconduct

1. The Program Director investigates the alleged misconduct to determine or confirm the facts, if necessary, with assistance from the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and Human Resources if unfamiliar with proper investigation procedures. University policy includes specific procedures for investigating certain offenses (e.g., sexual misconduct). In those cases, the Program Director refers the matter to the appropriate University office for investigation.
2. The Program Director reviews the facts as determined through the investigation, decides if the trainee has committed misconduct, and if so, decides on a discipline. Discipline for misconduct can include anything from a formal warning to dismissal from the program. Disciplines should reflect the severity of the conduct, and should be reasonable, calculated to ensure the conduct does not repeat. Discipline must also be consistent. It is highly recommended that the Program Director consults with the Office of Academic Affairs when evaluating and deciding on the appropriate discipline.
3. The Program Director prepares written findings that include the proposed discipline, shares the findings with the trainee, and gives them the opportunity to respond to the findings.
4. The determination as to whether discipline would be imposed will be made by an ad hoc committee consisting of five full-time advanced education faculty appointed by the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education.
5. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education assembles an ad hoc committee consisting of five full-time advanced education faculty. The faculty members of this committee must hold appointments in a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. If deemed to be of benefit, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education may also appoint a trainee as a non-voting member to assist the committee in deliberations. The trainee member would also be from a program other than that in which the trainee is enrolled. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education appoints a faculty chair of the committee and assists the committee chair in managing the process and ensuring procedural consistency. Panel deliberations and decision shall follow section H of the Campus Committee on Student Behavior Hearing Procedures - Twin Cities.
6. If the ad hoc committee determines that discipline is not warranted, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education prepares a letter to inform the trainee about the decision. If the ad hoc committee determines that reasonable grounds exist to validate the proposed discipline and that it should be imposed, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education will prepare a final discipline letter that notifies the trainee of the decision, including any discipline associated with the decision, as well as the trainee’s appeal rights.
7. If the discipline does not include dismissal from the program, the final discipline letter should include a description of any expectations regarding the trainee’s future conduct. It should indicate that any further incidents of misconduct will result in further discipline, up to and including dismissal from the program. If the decision is for dismissal from the program, then it should state if resignation from the program is an option.
8. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education issues the final discipline letter and any relevant policies to the trainee. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education should copy the Dean, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, and Program Director on the letter.
9. The Program Coordinator keeps a copy of the final discipline letter in the trainee’s academic file.
10. The trainee chooses, within thirty (30) calendar days, one of the following actions:
11. Accept the discipline;
12. Resign from the program if the option is offered; or
13. Request in writing to the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education a hearing to challenge the discipline.
14. If the trainee requests a hearing within thirty (30) calendar days following the effective date of the discipline, a prompt hearing shall be scheduled. If the trainee fails to request a hearing within the thirty-day period, their rights pursuant to this procedure shall be deemed to be waived. Hearings will be conducted following the School of Dentistry Code of Conduct Hearing Rules of Procedure.
15. A trainee disciplined based on misconduct is entitled to a campus-wide appeal of the decisions made in the hearing process according to the Administrative Procedure Student Conduct Code Procedures: Twin Cities. The following are the grounds for appealing a disciplinary decision:

• There was a significant procedural error sufficient to affect the outcome (e.g., lack of notice, opportunity to be heard, or opportunity to challenge information). A procedural error is not a basis for sustaining an appeal unless it was significant enough to affect the outcome.
• The rule found to have been violated was misapplied, misinterpreted, or contrary to law.
• New evidence exists that was not previously available to the appealing party and that is sufficient to affect the outcome.
• The outcome was grossly disproportionate to the offense.
• The decision was not based on substantial information. Substantial information means relevant information that a reasonable person might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. In making this determination, the appellate officer must respect the credibility determinations of the hearing body and must not substitute the officer's judgment for the hearing body. Rather, the appellate officer must determine whether the hearing body’s decision was unreasonable (i.e., arbitrary) considering the information presented.

Immediate Interim Suspension

Interim suspension is a temporary action that is protective in nature. It is designed to mitigate the risk to members of the University community by deterring future prohibited conduct. In circumstances of the most serious violations of policies, rules, laws, and misconduct, the University of Minnesota, an affiliated clinic or hospital, and the department or program of the trainee each has a right to impose an immediate interim suspension upon a trainee (1) to ensure the safety and wellbeing of members of the University community including patients or to preserve University property, (2) to ensure the trainee's own physical or emotional safety and wellbeing, or (3) if the trainee poses an ongoing threat of disrupting or interfering with the operations of the University. During the interim suspension, the trainee may be denied access to all University activities or privileges for which the trainee might otherwise be eligible, including access to University property. 

During the interim suspension, the trainee has the right to a timely review to evaluate whether the interim suspension remains in effect and the impact the interim suspension has on their academic standing and progression. An interim suspension will not be considered when determining responsibility during hearing or appeals processes.

1. The suspending official sends a Notice of Interim Suspension to the trainee’s University e-mail account. Trainees may additionally be notified by other means. The notification must include information regarding the alleged behavior, the rationale for the interim suspension, and the name of the official as a contact for questions about the interim suspension. The notice should stress the need to investigate the circumstances and that the trainee will receive more information after the investigation is complete. The suspending official may consult with other University personnel in deciding whether to impose an interim suspension and should always make the determination with the Title IX Coordinator (or designee) in all “sexual misconduct” cases.
2. A trainee who receives a Notice of Interim Suspension must immediately exit the portions of University property identified in the notice, if applicable, and shall not reenter unless in compliance with a written authorization.
3. If the trainee was suspended by someone other than the Program Director, the suspending official immediately contacts the trainee’s Program Director. The Program Director works with the suspending official to assemble documentation of the incident or misconduct. It must be ensured that academic due process is followed, including adherence to FERPA, Title IX, and professional confidentiality.
4. The Program Director immediately reports the interim suspension to the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, which triggers a review of whether the interim suspension should remain in effect. The review will take place within five (5) business days from the date of the reportor as soon as reasonably practical thereafter.
5. The Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, the Associate Dean for Patient Care and Clinical Services, and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (or their designees) will review the interim suspension decision and any relevant information to determine if the interim suspension should be upheld, modified, or lifted. The interim suspension will remain in effect while any review is pending.
6. The trainee is notified of the review decision as soon as administratively possible. The notification should be sent to the trainee’s University e-mail account and may additionally be sent by other means.
7. If the determination is made to lift the interim suspension, other interim restrictions (e.g., limited access to campus) may be assigned until the resolution of any related conduct.
8. If the determination is made to uphold or modify the interim suspension, the interim suspension will turn into a formal suspension. The Program Director then prepares a suspension letter that describes the areas of concern, the rationale for the suspension, and the scope of the suspension, whether comprehensive or prohibiting the trainee only from selected University property, activities, and/or privileges. The letter should state the fact that the suspension will not be counted toward the completion of the training time required to be eligible for board examination(s), an indication of what the trainee may or may not do while on suspension (e.g., no moonlighting), the suspension period, and the program's expectations for the trainee upon their return from suspension.
9. The Program Director issues the suspension letter to the trainee. The Program Director should copy the Dean, the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, and, if the suspension includes denial of access to University clinics, the Associate Dean for Patient Care and Clinical Services on the letter.
10. The Program Coordinator should notify the clinical sites and remove access to the EHR during the period of suspension. A copy of the suspension letter will be placed in the trainee's academic file. A suspension will be noted in all letters of reference.
11. At the end of the timeline stated in the suspension letter, the Program Director determines whether the trainee can return to education and clinical service. If the program's expectations for the trainee are met, the trainee will return. If the program's expectations for the trainee are not met, the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education, Associate Dean for Patient Care and Clinical Services, and the Associate Dean for Academic Affairs (or their designees) will determine if the suspension should be modified or extended.

After the imposition of a formal suspension, a trainee may request in writing to the Assistant Dean for Advanced Education a hearing to challenge the suspension. Hearings will be conducted following the School of Dentistry Code of Conduct Hearing Rules of Procedure. A trainee who is dissatisfied with the decision of the Hearing Board may file an appeal with the appellate officer according to the Administrative Procedure Student Conduct Code Procedures: Twin Cities.

FORMS/INSTRUCTIONS

There are no forms associated with this policy.

APPENDICES/LINKS

There are no appendices associated with this policy.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

There are no frequently asked questions associated with this policy.

CONTACTS

DEFINITIONS

Academic deficiency

Failure to maintain a satisfactory academic record. Examples of academic deficiencies include, but are not limited to the following:

• Inadequate knowledge or inability to apply knowledge appropriately to the situation.
• Inability to master the technical skills required to competently practice in the specialty.
• Unsatisfactory interpersonal, communication, and professionalism skills with patients, colleagues, and other personnel.
• Unacceptable academic commitment, such as not fulfilling all responsibilities, not participating in all required educational activities, and not completing all required documentation and assignments.
• Unsatisfactory recognition of own limits, such as failing to seek appropriate help when indicated.
• Failure to meet program-specific academic requirements.

Non-academic deficiency

Behavior judged to be objectionable, unethical, or illegal, or violation of school or institutional policies or rules, or civil or criminal law. Examples of non-academic deficiencies include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Failure to fulfill any term of the employment contract or violation of University of Minnesota or affiliated training site policies.
• Violations of mutual respect or Code of Conduct.
• Threatening, intimidating, harassing, or coercing patients, learners, employees, volunteers, or visitors on University of Minnesota premises at any time for any reason.
• Lying or cheating, misrepresentation, plagiarism.
• Distribution, possession, or use non-prescribed drugs or illegal/controlled substances on University of Minnesota property.
• Reporting with the odor of alcohol on one’s breath or appearing to be under the influence of alcoholic beverages or any drug that impairs judgment or work performance.
• Theft, vandalism, misuse, misallocation, or inappropriate removal or disposal of property belonging to the University of Minnesota, patients, learners, employees, or visitors.
• Breach of ethics concerning confidentiality of employee, patient, or institutional information.
• Engaging in criminal behavior.
• Engaging in sexual misconduct.
• Any deliberate or negligent act that jeopardizes the health or safety of a patient, employee, learner, volunteer, or visitor.
• Dishonesty in dealing with a patient, student, faculty, or staff member.
• Fighting, agitating a fight, or attempting bodily harm to anyone on University of Minnesota property.
• Bringing a firearm or weapon onto University of Minnesota’s property without authorization.
• Failure to report for expected assignments without notification, including excessive tardiness or repeated unexcused absenteeism.
• Disruptive behaviors, which compromise the learning environment of colleagues.
• Conscious and reckless disregard for safety rules or University of Minnesota’s safety practices.
• Failure to comply with infection control protocol.
• Improper management of patient records.
• Abandonment of patients.
• Use of instruments or materials not approved for use in the clinics.

Probation

A trial period in which a trainee is permitted to redeem academic performance or behavioral conduct that does not meet the standard of the program.

Suspension

A period of time in which a trainee is not allowed to take part in all or identified program activities. Time spent on suspension may not be counted toward the completion of program requirements.

Dismissal

The condition in which a trainee is directed to leave the training program, with no award of credit for the current year, and termination of association with the University of Minnesota School of Dentistry and its participating teaching hospitals.

RELATED INFORMATION

Conflict Resolution Process for Student Academic Complaints Policy

School of Dentistry Code of Conduct Hearing Rules of Procedure

Student Conduct Code Procedures: Twin Cities

HISTORY

• Approving Body: Council of Chairs
• Date Approved: May 22, 2024
• Date Effective: May 22, 2024