Complete this form for registration in CDS 600 Independent Study, CDS 699 Doctoral Theory & Research and CDS 700 Research. All sections must be completely filled out. The form must be approved by the course instructor. Please email it to the Graduate Coordinatorto be resgistered. Note that CDS 700 can be used with PhD, MA thesis and AuD.
Students in the MA program may be registered for fewer than 12 credits, the minimum number of credits required for status as a Full-time student. Some students may need to complete a "Certification of Full-time Status" form to verify continued enrollment at UB. Common reasons include
The Certification of Full-time Status form can be downloaded from the Graduate School here. Complete the top portion of the form and then forward it to the current CDS Graduate Coordinator for signatures. The CDS Department will then route to the Graduate School.
Because our Department is highly selective in the admission process, the overwhelming majority of students who begin the Master’s (MA) and AuD program matriculate on time. However, for a variety of reasons, a student may experience difficulty at some time during their program and this may result in being placed on academic or clinical probation. In most cases, this situation is resolved with support and guidance.
Students may be placed on probation or be dismissed from the MA or AuD graduate program at the Department's discretion, based on documented unsatisfactory academic and/or clinical performance, including the performance of externship placements.
Students will be placed on Academic Probation during the semester following any semester in which their cumulative grade point average (GPA) falls below 3.0.
A student may not be placed on academic probation more than once, across their graduate career. If a student falls below this minimum grade point average for a second time, they will be dismissed from the program without a probationary semester.
Students will be put on Clinic Probation during the semester following any semester in which their overall clinical performance is considered unsatisfactory.
During the probationary semester:
A student may not be placed on clinical probation more than once, across their graduate career. If a student receives an unsatisfactory in clinic for a second time, they will be dismissed from the program without a probationary semester.
In cases where there is a discrepancy among clinical faculty in the assignment of a semester-final grade, the following policy will apply to determine the state of clinical hours accumulated in the semester:
Students may appeal their dismissal by sending a written appeal to the Chair of the Grievance Committee for their program no later than two weeks after receiving written notification of removal from the program. Students are encouraged to discuss the situation with their academic advisor in preparing the appeal. The Grievance Committee will recommend an outcome of the appeal to the Department Chair (for academic probation) or the Clinic Director (for clinical probation) who will make the final decision about the appeal.
It is department policy that all CDS courses (excluding practicum) must be taken for a letter grade. In addition the required Graduate Statistics Course must be taken for a letter grade. Student may opt to take up to six credits of elective coursework for a grade of S/U (Satisfactory vs. Unsatisfactory). Students must contact the course instructor in writing of their desire to take a course S/U. It is the discretion of the instructor whether they grant the student's request. Additional information may be found at the Graduate School Website.
"A complaint about any accredited program or program in candidacy status may be submitted by any student, instructional staff member, speech-language pathologist, audiologist, and/or member of the public" (per CAA website).
All complaints must be signed and submitted in writing to the vice presidents for academic affairs ("Vice Presidents") American Speech Language-Hearing Association, 2200 Research Boulevard, #310, Rockville, MD 20850.
Phone: 301-296-5700
Email: accreditation@asha.org
Recommended Use of Generative AI for Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects.
The Department of Communicative Disorders and Sciences at the University at Buffalo recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) tools can be valuable supports in the development of dissertations, theses, and capstone projects when used thoughtfully, responsibly, and transparently. Used well, these tools may help students sharpen their critical thinking by supporting activities such as brainstorming, exploring perspectives, organizing ideas, reviewing the literature, refining analytical processes, and improving clarity of expression. At the same time, AI tools are meant to support, not replace, the student’s own intellectual work, scholarly judgment, analysis, and authorship. Students remain fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of all submitted work, including carefully checking any AI-assisted material, protecting sensitive or confidential information, and disclosing substantial AI use in accordance with university, departmental, and project-specific expectations.
AI Use by Activity Area
● Idea development and critical thinking
Generative AI may be used to support early-stage thinking activities such as brainstorming topics, refining research questions, exploring alternative perspectives, identifying possible counterarguments, and clarifying complex concepts. In these cases, AI should be used to prompt reflection, comparison, and critical thinking, not to supply conclusions or replace the student’s own reasoning.
● Literature engagement and research support
AI tools may assist with preliminary literature-related tasks such as summarizing articles, identifying broad themes across sources, comparing perspectives, or helping students orient themselves to a body of scholarship. Students remain responsible for reading relevant sources directly, evaluating their quality and relevance, and ensuring that all interpretations, syntheses, and citations are accurate.
● Organization and project planning
AI may be used to help students organize ideas, develop outlines, map possible sections, or think through the structure of an argument or project. These uses are appropriate when they help students plan and refine their own work rather than generate the substance of that work.
● Analysis and research workflow
AI tools may be used in limited ways to support aspects of research workflow, such as organizing materials, assisting with coding or scripting, identifying possible patterns, or helping students think through analytic options. However, any use of AI in analysis must be approached with caution. Students are responsible for independently evaluating all outputs, methods, and interpretations. AI should not be treated as an autonomous analytic authority, and the project’s analytic decisions, interpretations, methodology, and conclusions must remain the student’s own work and scholarly judgment.
● Use of research data
AI may be used to facilitate analysis only when the data have been fully de-identified and when such use is consistent with university policy, applicable legal and ethical standards, and, where relevant, approved research protocols. Students must not upload or enter identifiable, confidential, unpublished, proprietary, FERPA-protected, HIPAA-protected, or human-subject data into public AI systems. When there is any uncertainty about whether data are sufficiently de-identified or whether the use of AI is permissible, students should consult their advisor, committee chair, IRB documentation, or other appropriate university guidance before proceeding.
● Writing refinement
AI may be used in limited ways to improve grammar, readability, style, or clarity in the text the student has already drafted. It should not be used to generate core sections of a dissertation, thesis, or capstone project, to produce substantial original text on the student’s behalf, or to paraphrase large sections in ways that obscure authorship. The final written work must represent the student’s own scholarly voice, analysis, and intellectual contribution.
● Accuracy, verification, and accountability
Because AI systems may generate inaccurate, incomplete, biased, or fabricated content, students are responsible for critically evaluating and verifying all AI-assisted material before incorporating it into their work. Responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and ethical use of all submitted work always rests with the student.
● Transparency and disclosure
Students should acknowledge substantial use of AI in a manner consistent with the expectations of their advisor, research lab, clinic, committee, or department. In general, uses of AI that materially shape the development, analysis, or presentation of a project should be disclosed. Students may also be asked to document how AI was used during the research and writing process in order to support transparency and responsible scholarly practice.
● Faculty consultation and disciplinary judgment
Because expectations may differ across projects, methods, and subfields, students should consult with their advisor, committee chair, or program faculty when they are uncertain whether a specific use of AI is appropriate. Faculty guidance, disciplinary standards, and project-specific requirements should always take priority over general advice.