UW School of Medicine and Public Health — Dismissal & Appeals

Written by Zachary Gaynor, attorney · The Florida Bar, admitted 2016 · court admissions. Reviewed 3 September 2026.

Who decides whether a UW medical student is dismissed?

The Student Promotion and Academic Review Committee (SPARC) dismisses at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health. The first “appeal” is a reconsideration by SPARC itself — which first votes on whether to hear it at all — and only then does it reach the Educational Policy and Curriculum Committee. The two windows are both thirty days, measured in two different units.

Two consecutive thirty-day windows, two different units, one document

Both of these appear in the same policy:

• Reconsideration by SPARC: “within thirty (30) business days of the date of SPARC’s written decision.”
• Appeal to the EPCC: “within thirty (30) days…” and then, defining the term, “For purposes of this section, ‘days’ means calendar days excluding holidays.”

Thirty business days and thirty calendar days are roughly six weeks apart. For a student dismissed in December, the practical difference is substantial. This is the clearest deadline ambiguity in the Wisconsin material and it is entirely of the School’s making — but it is not a reason to relax. Work to the calendar-day reading throughout, and preserve the point.

One more: after the EPCC upholds a dismissal, the election to withdraw instead must be made “within 14 days” of receiving written notification — unit unspecified. Official notification is by university email, so the clock starts when it lands, not when it is read.

Dismissal is not stayed, and you cannot sit the exam that would fix it

UW is explicit: “The dismissal decision will not be stayed (i.e., suspended) pending reconsideration or appeal.” And: “If a student has been dismissed, the student has no active standing as a UWSMPH medical student during the reconsideration process” — repeated for the appeal. Suspension likewise “cannot be stayed or deferred.”

Then this: “Students dismissed or appealing dismissal may not sit for (i.e., take) any USMLE or NBME exams.”

That is unusually harsh, and it deserves to be understood clearly. Where the dismissal followed an examination problem, the student is barred from taking the examination that would cure it while arguing they should be allowed to. Dismissed students also may not enroll in MD courses “or any other UW-Madison course” as special students. The practical effect is that time spent appealing is time in which nothing can be repaired — which argues for moving quickly and for raising the exam bar directly if it bites.

The record closes early, and reconsideration is narrowly gated

Reconsideration is available “only when the student wishes to present to SPARC new and/or additional facts that occurred during the academic time in question.” Facts that arose later — including, on its face, a diagnosis obtained after the decision — do not obviously qualify.

And on appeal: “Only the facts presented to SPARC may be introduced at the appeal before the EPCC.” “No new facts or information may be presented by the student.”

So the SPARC stage is the only place a factual record can be built. Anything omitted there is unavailable afterwards. That is the single most important scheduling fact in a UW matter.

You carry the burden, on four closed grounds

No standard of proof is published for SPARC’s underlying findings, academic or professionalism. What is published is the appellant’s burden: “The burden of proof shall be on the student to demonstrate that the SPARC reconsideration decision was based to a significant degree on one or more of the above conditions.”

The EPCC grounds are closed and there are four: UWSMPH policies were incorrectly applied; the decision is contrary to state or federal law; proper procedures were not followed; or SPARC made unfounded assumptions of fact about the student’s performance or behavior. The EPCC “does not adjudicate course grade appeals” and “is not empowered to overturn course grades” — so a disputed grade has to be fixed elsewhere, and first.

The contradiction between UW’s own two documents

Policy SMPH-8010 — approved by the Vice Chancellor for Medical Affairs and Dean, and whose stated purpose is “to ensure that… medical students receive due process” — provides that MD students have the right to “question any adverse witnesses” and to “present information relevant to their case, including presenting witnesses.”

The detailed operative procedure describes no witness process at SPARC at all, closes the EPCC record to anything not already before SPARC, and limits the person accompanying the student to a non-speaking support role.

That is a direct conflict between two current UW SMPH documents, at a public institution, one of which enumerates confrontation rights the other never implements. It is the strongest single point in the UW material, and it should be raised in writing at the SPARC stage — demanding the witness process SMPH-8010 promises — rather than saved for the appeal, where the record is already closed.

The support person may not speak; the School’s lawyer is in the room

At SPARC the student “may be accompanied by one person, whose primary role is to support the student. It is not expected that this person will speak on behalf of the student.” At the EPCC the same, with the support person able to help address questions only “as directly requested by committee members.”

No attorney is named anywhere, and no advance-notice requirement is published. Meanwhile, in closed session, “only voting and ex officio members of SPARC and legal counsel may be present.” The School’s counsel sits in the deliberations; the student’s support person may not speak in the hearing.

Why UWS 14 and UWS 17 do not save you here

Wisconsin governs student conduct by administrative rule — ch. UWS 14 for academic misconduct and ch. UWS 17 for non-academic misconduct. Those chapters would give a student materially more than SPARC does:

• A standard of proof: clear and convincing evidence for suspension or expulsion under both chapters.
• A lawyer who can speak: under UWS 17 the advisor “may be a lawyer,” and for suspension or expulsion the lawyer “may question adverse witnesses, present information and witnesses, and speak on behalf of the respondent.”
• Appeal beyond the school — to the Chancellor and then the Board of Regents. The EPCC is the end of the road.
• A defined unit: UWS 14 states that “days” means calendar days.

The MD promotion process runs outside those chapters, and the drafting shows it was deliberate. UW’s companion policy for its non-MD health-professions students — physical therapy, genetic counselling, PA and MPH — states expressly that those students “are subject to the rules and regulations contained in Wis. Admin. Code UWS §§ 14, 17, and 18.” The MD policy has no parallel clause. Same school, same policy library, opposite drafting.

University-wide academic misconduct — cheating and plagiarism — does still reach MD students through UWS 14. But academic performance and professionalism dismissals do not. Establishing which of the two a case really is remains the first question, and at UW it is worth pressing hard, because the difference is a lawyer who can speak and an appeal that reaches the Regents.

Automatic dismissal triggers

• Failing the same course twice.
• Phase 1 not completed within 36 months of matriculation.
• Clinical phases not completed within 36 months of beginning them.
• The MD curriculum not completed within six years of matriculation.

All are subject to an approved individualised plan, which is the thing to negotiate before a trigger fires rather than after. A U or IF on six or more credits in Phase 3 also permits SPARC to dismiss.

Two protections worth invoking

Recusal: any SPARC member who provided medical or mental health services to the student must recuse. Mentors and Integrated Block Leaders are ineligible to vote. Ask for the membership list and check it.

Quorum: SPARC’s quorum is nine. If it fails, the student is offered only two options — waive quorum rights and accept the decision of those present as binding, or accept email voting. There is no option to adjourn. Neither is obviously in a student’s interest, and the choice is worth making with advice.

Also note: return from a medical leave requires a written physician evaluation, and “SPARC may require an independent opinion by a physician of its choice.” Drug and alcohol screening may be imposed for the duration of the student’s medical education, where “any noncompliance, including missing/skipping a session for any reason, is considered a failed test,” at the student’s cost.

Where the governing documents are

Verified as loading on 3 September 2026:

• MD Program Policy: Curriculum and Student Review, approved 11 June 2025 — kb.wisc.edu
• MD Program Policy: Advancement — kb.wisc.edu
• SMPH-8010, Medical Student Disciplinary Action and Sanctions — policy.wisc.edu
• SMPH-8070, the non-MD policy that expressly applies UWS 14, 17 and 18 — policy.wisc.edu

The MD Program Student Handbook is a different matter: a landing page confirms a 2026-2027 edition modified 15 June 2026, but exposes no document. No public URL located — the content appears gated to the internal network, and Section 11, the Professional Behavior Code cross-referenced by the policies, could not be retrieved. SPARC’s bylaws, which govern its voting membership, are also not public. Both are worth requesting in writing.

Related reading

• Medical school dismissal, remediation and promotion committees
• Professionalism and fitness-to-practice findings
• Due process at public institutions
• Public or private? A due-process decision tree
• Wisconsin student defense

Other Wisconsin schools

Every school writes its own dismissal, appeal and conduct rules, and the filing deadlines are rarely the same from one campus to the next. These pages set out the procedure at other Wisconsin schools:

• Medical College of Wisconsin
• Midwest College of Acupuncture and Herbal Medicine

Common questions

How long do I have to appeal at UW SMPH?

Thirty business days for reconsideration by SPARC and thirty calendar days excluding holidays for the EPCC appeal — both stated in the same policy. Work to the calendar-day reading and preserve the conflict.

Can I keep studying while I appeal?

No. UW states the dismissal is not stayed, that you have no active standing during reconsideration or appeal, and that you may not enroll in any other UW-Madison course.

Can I sit USMLE while appealing?

No. UW bars students who are dismissed or appealing dismissal from sitting any USMLE or NBME examination.

Can I bring a lawyer to SPARC?

The policy names no attorney and provides only one support person who is “not expected to speak.” Note that SMPH-8010 separately promises the right to question adverse witnesses — a right the operative procedure never implements. That contradiction is worth raising at the SPARC stage.

Do the UWS 14 and UWS 17 protections apply to me?

Not to an MD promotion or professionalism dismissal. UW applies those chapters expressly to its non-MD health-professions students and pointedly not to MD students, so the SPARC route carries neither their standard of proof nor their right to a lawyer who can speak.