Academic performance is the responsibility of every student. This section provides detailed information regarding MIT academic honesty policies, minimium academic standards and provides links to resources to help you improve your performance.

Academic Honesty

Cheating, plagiarism, unauthorized collaboration, and other forms of academic dishonesty are considered serious offenses for which disciplinary penalties can be imposed.

Some academic offenses by students are handled directly between the faculty member and the students involved. In some cases, it may be necessary for the department head to review, or otherwise to assist in, the resolution of the matter. The faculty member may choose whether to take direct action or to bring the matter to the Committee on Discipline. More information can be found in the MIT Bulletin in the section on Complaint and Disciplinary Procedures.

A policy statement on Academic Honesty is available in section 10.2 of MIT Policies and Procedures.

Minimum Academic Standards and Ratings

Because of the individual nature of student academic performance and differences in academic and grading policies among departments, the Committee on Academic Performance (CAP) cannot set forth rigid standards of academic performance to be employed throughout the Institute. It is the responsibility of the CAP, however, to see that the action on specific undergraduates proposed by the individual departments is reasonably consistent throughout the Institute.

The CAP normally expects a minimum academic record reflecting the satisfactory completion of 36 units of credit with a term rating above 3.0 at the end of any regular term, unless the committee has specifically notified an individual student that a higher level of performance is required. (The latter would only occur as a result of a previously poor performance.)

The CAP considers each student's academic performance on an individual basis. Consideration is given not only to the grades received, but also to the total number of General Institute Requirements (GIRs) and units beyond GIRs completed (in relation to the norm for the student's class), the nature of the subjects themselves, and those factors in the student's personal situation which may have affected his or her academic performance in a given term. If a department feels that the performance of a particular student is below standard, it must recommend to the CAP some course of action within the guidelines set out below.

Students should be reminded that some scholarship-granting agencies (e.g., the ROTC programs) have stricter minimum academic standards than those of MIT itself.

Academic Review for Regular Students

Students' academic performance is evaluated by their department and then by the Committee on Academic Performance (CAP) at the end of the fall and spring terms. (The Office of Undergraduate Advising and Academic Programming serves as the department for freshmen and undesignated sophomores.)

Students are reviewed for possible academic deficiency as a result of poor grades or low units. Upperclass students are automatically marked for review if they have a term rating of 3.0 or less, or they are registered for 35 units or fewer at the end of the term. Freshmen are reviewed if they receive 39 or fewer units of credit; the number of subjects they passed is considered since they do not have term ratings.

The Committee on Academic Performance (CAP) will not consider petitions from students to designate or remove the designation of an Exploratory subject after Add Date, to change to Listener status after the next Registration Day, or to reinstate the grade and credit once the student has forfeited them. The Exploratory status of subjects may be considered in the CAP end of term review. The CAP may also consider petitions to revoke a CAP action if a student's status is changed by a conversion of an Exploratory Subject to Listener. There is no change, however, to the other policies governing CAP petitions regarding the deadlines associated with designating subjects as Exploratory.