Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago: Student Discipline, Dismissal & Federal Court

How do student discipline and dismissal cases work at TTIC?

The Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago (TTIC) is a private, philanthropically endowed, graduate-only computer science institute on the University of Chicago campus in Hyde Park, Cook County. It offers a PhD in computer science (with a master’s along the way), has held Illinois Board of Higher Education authority to confer the MS and PhD since 2003, and has been accredited by the Higher Learning Commission since 2009; its 2024 entering class of ten was, by its own account, its largest. Its rules present a sharp contrast: its Discipline Committee “presumes the innocence of the student charged,” draws “no prejudicial inference” from a refusal to answer, and lets an advisor “who may be an attorney” call witnesses and lodge objections — but the academic rules publish no appeal from the decisions that can end a TTIC PhD: a failed qualifying exam, a missed candidacy deadline, or a faculty vote to terminate.

Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago is a private institution. There is no state action, so there is no constitutional due process claim, and arguing one wastes an appeal. The theory is contract: Illinois holds that a college and its students have a contractual relationship whose terms come from the catalog and the handbook — Raethz v. Aurora University, 346 Ill. App. 3d 728 (2004), restated by the Fourth District in Urso v. Bradley University, 2023 IL App (4th) 230165 — while adding that the relationship “is unique and cannot be strictly categorized or characterized in purely contractual terms.”

The limit is the standard of review, and it decides most of these cases before anyone reaches the facts. A student has a remedy for an adverse academic decision only if it was made arbitrarily, capriciously, or in bad faith. Frederick v. Northwestern University Dental School, 247 Ill. App. 3d 464 (1993), puts it bluntly — courts have been loath to review, much less overturn, academic dismissals — and Bosch v. NorthShore University Health System, 2019 IL App (1st) 190070, holds that a school which departs somewhat from its handbook still wins unless the departure was material. The federal courts in Chicago apply the same test: in Doe v. Columbia College Chicago, 933 F.3d 849 (7th Cir. 2019), the Seventh Circuit affirmed dismissal of a student’s contract claim where the college had investigated and reasoned its way to a decision, and in Gash v. Rosalind Franklin University, 117 F.4th 957 (7th Cir. 2024), it held that calling a process arbitrary or predetermined, without specific facts, is not enough. What survives is specific: in Liu v. Northwestern University, 78 F. Supp. 3d 839 (N.D. Ill. 2015), a former law student’s claim went forward where the school imposed what amounted to an integrity charge while denying her the handbook procedure for contesting one. Which federal statutes reach TTIC depends on a fact worth confirming early — whether it receives federal financial assistance.

A federal claim arising at Toyota Technological Institute at Chicago is filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois — Cook County sits in its Eastern Division under 28 U.S.C. § 93(a), and the statute fixes the places of holding court for that division at Chicago and Wheaton. I am a member of the general bar of that court, admitted on my Florida license under its Local Rule 83.10, which opens the general bar to an attorney in good standing before the highest court of any state. That means a Title IX, Section 504 or ADA complaint for a TTIC student is one I file and litigate under my own name, with no pro hac vice motion. The Northern District abrogated its local-counsel designation rule in July 2023, so a member of its bar with no office in the district no longer has to designate local counsel. One limit, stated plainly: the court keeps a separate trial bar, and under Local Rule 83.12 a general-bar member who is not on it — that is me — appears alone in everything except testimonial proceedings, meaning evidentiary hearings and trial, where a trial-bar member must sit as advisor unless the judge grants the rule’s narrow waiver.

The conduct process is unusually protective — on paper

Discipline is in Section IV of the Student Handbook (the version dated September 15, 2026), which says it “does not constitute a contract between TTIC and any individual.” Sexual harassment, discrimination and academic fraud each have their own policies; everything else goes through the general procedure. A Designated Institute Administrator — the Chief Academic Officer or one of the two graduate-studies directors — evaluates the report and, if it goes forward, sends a written notice that must include “all documents obtained by the Designated Institute Administrator that are relevant to the report” and a printed copy of the procedures. The student has “fourteen calendar days after the date the notification is sent” to respond. A student who admits the charge can take an administrative penalty and still demand a hearing on the penalty alone “within seven calendar days after transmission of notice of the penalty.”

A formal hearing goes to a Discipline Committee of three students and three faculty. Objections to a member’s impartiality are due “at least seven calendar days before the hearing,” and everything the committee will see must reach the student “at least one week before the hearing.” The committee “presumes the innocence of the student charged” and “ignores any previous history of disciplinary action.” The student may decline to answer any question, and “no prejudicial inference will be drawn from such refusal.” An advisor, “who may be an attorney,” may call witnesses, ask procedural questions, lodge objections and consult, but “otherwise may not speak during the hearing unless requested by the adjudicator.” The committee decides “by a preponderance of the evidence, voted on by secret ballot” — a simple majority, though expulsion needs four affirmative votes — and recommends a penalty that the administrator may impose or reduce.

The student may then ask the President for review; the request “must be received by the President no later than sixty days” after the determination notice — the handbook does not say whether these are calendar or business days. A Committee of Review may send a case back but may never turn an exoneration into a finding or raise the penalty. The text is not tidy: it calls the committee’s decision “final” before providing this review, and it cites a “Committee on Regulations and Discipline” it nowhere creates. Suspension is capped at nine quarters; after expulsion, re-application is normally not entertained for eleven quarters. Withdrawing does not end a case, and holds can block the degree. The Academic Fraud and Academic Misconduct Policy is not public; it sits on TTIC’s DocTract system behind a sign-in.

Academic standing: half a stipend, and no published appeal from termination

The Academic Program Guide (September 2026) sets the academic rules. A student who misses a program requirement, or a requirement the Director of Graduate Studies sets in writing, is typically placed on Academic Probation, which brings “a 50% reduction in stipend” until the requirements are met; the notice must state the steps and the deadline for returning to good standing. An extension of probation by one quarter must be requested before that deadline and “will be granted only in rare circumstances.” Suspension and termination are decisions of “the Faculty,” and “Termination does not provide for a path to return to the program.” The faculty review every student twice a year, in autumn and spring, and send a letter of evaluation signed by the advisor and the Director of Graduate Studies.

Two milestones carry the real risk. After a non-pass on the qualifying exam, the student “must leave the PhD program or petition the DGS to continue in the program and retake the exam,” and the exam committee’s view on a retake “is only a recommendation.” Candidacy requires a research advisor and a faculty vote, and “If Candidacy is not approved by the end of the Autumn Quarter of a student’s third year,” absent special arrangements, participation “will be terminated.” Because the advising relationship “requires the ongoing consent of both parties,” an advisor’s withdrawal can put candidacy itself at risk. Petitions go by email to the Director of Graduate Studies and “must be made no later than six weeks prior to the due date of the requirement in question.” Grade changes rest with the instructor and “can not be appealed.”

Neither the guide nor the handbook publishes an appeal from a faculty vote to terminate. What remains is the handbook’s petition for “special consideration under an Academic Program regulation or an interpretation thereof,” and its grievance procedure: a signed letter naming the specific policy violated, a preponderance standard with the burden on the student, and an appeal to the President “within five (5) business days of receiving that decision,” whose ruling “is final and not subject to further review.”

Involuntary leave

A Designated Institute Administrator may require an assessment by Student Wellness or Counseling Services and may impose an involuntary leave of absence — or an emergency interim leave before deciding — where a student poses a substantial risk, cannot function as a student, or refuses to cooperate with an evaluation. The leave is generally retroactive to the start of the quarter. Review by the Chief Academic Officer must be requested “within fifteen days of the date of the decision” — the policy does not say whether these are calendar or business days — and the leave stays in effect meanwhile.

Title IX: a 2020-style live hearing

For sexual misconduct, the federal rule is the 2020 Title IX regulation: the 2024 rule was vacated nationwide on January 9, 2025, in Tennessee v. Cardona, and on September 29, 2026 the Department of Education formally repealed it and restored the pre-2024 text (91 Fed. Reg. 61,308). TTIC’s resources page says that after the January 2025 ruling it reinstated its earlier policies “to comply with the 2020 Title IX regulations,” and its Sexual Harassment Policy (current version dated January 10, 2025) is built on them. The 2020 regulation requires postsecondary institutions to hold a live hearing at which each party’s advisor conducts cross-examination; at TTIC, advisors ask relevant questions “directly, orally, and in real time,” TTIC supplies an advisor without charge to a party who has none, and the statements of anyone who refuses to submit to questioning “will not be considered.” Facts are found on a preponderance of the evidence, and an interim removal requires TTIC to offer to meet the respondent within twenty-four hours. Outside the hearing, advisors “play a passive role.”

The appeal clock is short: “within seven (7) days” of notice of the determination, to the Chief Academic Officer for student respondents, counting every day including weekends and federal holidays, with a deadline that lands on one rolling to 5:00 p.m. central time on the next business day. The policy lists four grounds — procedural irregularity, new evidence, conflict of interest or bias, and a disproportionate sanction — then tells appellants to identify “which one or more of the three grounds” they assert. Cite every ground that applies, by name. Other discrimination and harassment complaints go under a separate policy, where an investigator decides on a preponderance of the evidence and an appeal goes to the President or Secretary “within thirty (30) days” of the resolution letter.

What a student defense lawyer can do here

Most of the value is early and quiet. It is reading TTIC’s rules against what was actually done and finding the gap; writing the response or the appeal so it argues the grounds the rules recognize rather than the ones that feel most unfair; preserving the federal issues — Title IX, Section 504 and the ADA, FERPA — so they are in the record if the case ever leaves campus; and identifying comparators, because a sanction far outside what similar cases drew is one of the few arguments that reliably moves a decision-maker.

TTIC calls for two specific moves. In a conduct case, use the procedure’s protections deliberately: object to a member seven calendar days out, insist on the one-week document rule, decide in advance whether to answer questions knowing silence carries no inference, and bring an advisor who can call witnesses and object. In an academic case, file early and in writing — the six-week petition rule rewards the student who sees the problem coming — and where a written step was skipped, such as a probation notice without the required steps and deadline, use the grievance procedure so the omission is on the record. Confirm the federal facts early, too: TTIC requires no financial aid forms, but its timeline lists National Science Foundation awards to faculty, it says stipends are funded “by internal TTIC funds or faculty research grants,” and it names a Title IX Coordinator who is also its Section 504/ADA Coordinator.

What a lawyer cannot do is turn a campus process into a trial. The rules of evidence do not apply, there is no discovery, and the school decides its own case at first instance. That is exactly why the written record built during the campus process is everything: by the time a court looks at it, the record is closed.

The one Illinois statute that gives you procedure

Illinois has no general statute setting notice periods, hearing formats, standards of proof or appeal rights for college students. The Illinois School Code, 105 ILCS 5, has a detailed suspension and expulsion scheme, and it applies to elementary and secondary schools, not here. The exception is the Preventing Sexual Violence in Higher Education Act, 110 ILCS 155, and it is a real one. It reaches every higher education institution in the state — public universities, community colleges, and private not-for-profit and for-profit institutions alike — and it requires timely written notice of the allegations to all parties, an investigation that is adequate, reliable and impartial, written notice of the outcome, and appeal rights. It requires the school to make confidential advisors available, trained to a statutory standard and kept separate from the people deciding the case. Both parties are entitled to an advisor of their choice, and that advisor may be an attorney — although the institution may limit how far an attorney-advisor participates in a hearing, which is why TTIC’s own rule on that, set out above, still governs what your lawyer may do in the room. The standard of proof is preponderance of the evidence, applied the same way to both sides.

What to do first

1. Diary every clock the day a notice arrives. Fourteen calendar days to answer a conduct charge; seven calendar days to demand a penalty hearing or object to a member; five business days for a grievance appeal; seven days, counted strictly, for a Title IX appeal; fifteen days for an involuntary-leave review; sixty days for the President’s review. Where no unit is given, count calendar days.
2. Petition six weeks early. If a qualifying-exam, candidacy or course deadline is in doubt, the petition to the Director of Graduate Studies is due six weeks before it.
3. Get the documents TTIC keeps behind a sign-in. Download the Academic Fraud and Academic Misconduct Policy and any other DocTract policy that applies, plus every evaluation letter you have received.
4. Check the charge notice against the handbook. It must include the documents the administrator obtained and a printed copy of the procedures. If anything is missing, ask for it in writing.
5. If you hold a student visa, plan for it. The handbook says sanction information may be shared with the International Affairs Office, so read the visa consequences before agreeing to any resolution.
6. Do not withdraw to make it go away. The process continues without you and holds can block the degree. The Illinois overview page explains how campus cases reach court.

One honest caveat about geography. Illinois has three federal districts. I am admitted to two of them, the Northern and the Southern. A federal claim arising at a school in Springfield, Peoria, Champaign-Urbana or the Quad Cities falls in the Central District; I am not a member of that bar, and those matters I handle with local counsel in that district or by pro hac vice admission. Appeals from the Northern District go to the Seventh Circuit, which keeps its own bar; my appellate admission is in the Eleventh. I say so before a retainer rather than after.

Where I am licensed. I am licensed to practice law in Florida. I am admitted to the bars of the U.S. District Courts for the Southern, Middle and Northern Districts of Florida, the District of Colorado, the Northern and Southern Districts of Illinois, the District of Nebraska, the District of New Mexico, and the Western District of Wisconsin, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Federal court admission is not a license to practice the law of the state in which the court sits. I am not licensed in Illinois and do not advise on Illinois state law or appear in Illinois state court.

Other schools in the Northern District of Illinois

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

• University of Chicago
• University of Illinois Chicago
• University of Illinois Chicago School of Law
• University of Saint Mary of the Lake (Mundelein Seminary)
• University of St. Francis
• VanderCook College of Music

Common questions about TTIC student cases

Can I bring a lawyer to a TTIC disciplinary hearing?

Yes, as an advisor. The handbook lets each party have an advisor at their own expense, “who may be an attorney.” The advisor may call witnesses, ask clarifying procedural questions, lodge objections and consult with you, but otherwise may not speak unless the adjudicator asks. In a Title IX hearing your advisor conducts the questioning of the other party and witnesses, and TTIC will supply an advisor if you have none.

What standard of proof does TTIC use?

Preponderance of the evidence, across the board: the Discipline Committee decides by preponderance on a secret ballot, the Title IX hearing officer resolves disputed facts by preponderance, the discrimination investigator uses it, and a student who files a grievance carries the burden under the same standard. The Discipline Committee must also presume the student innocent and may not draw any inference from a refusal to answer questions.

Can I appeal a failed qualifying exam at TTIC?

Not as such. After a non-pass, the guide says the student “must leave the PhD program or petition the DGS to continue in the program and retake the exam.” The committee’s view on a retake is only a recommendation, so the petition should answer it directly. All exams must be passed by week 8 of the summer quarter, so the petition should go in as early as possible, with any extension requested in writing.

What happens if I do not reach candidacy at TTIC on time?

If candidacy is not approved by the end of the autumn quarter of your third year, and the Director of Graduate Studies has not approved special arrangements, your participation is terminated — and termination “does not provide for a path to return to the program.” Candidacy needs a committed research advisor, so if that relationship is fraying, petition for arrangements well before the deadline.

How long do I have to respond to a TTIC conduct charge?

Fourteen calendar days after the notice is sent. In that time you can admit, deny, admit in part or explain circumstances. If you admit and accept an administrative penalty, you still have seven calendar days after the penalty notice to demand a hearing on the penalty alone. If the case goes to a hearing, objections to a committee member’s impartiality are due at least seven calendar days before it.