|
ACADEMIC SECTION
INFORMATION NOTE |
2000-01 |
N17 |
|
From: |
Joanne Tallentire,
Assistant Registrar |
5 June
2001 |
This information note refers to
decisions made at the following meetings:
ASC – 5 March 2001 and 18 May
2001
APC – 28 February
2001
Senate – 21 March
2001
Minute numbers are given to
indicate the source of the information set out below. Where extracts of minutes
are included verbatim, this is indicated by speech marks.
1.
Code of Practice on
Teaching by Graduate Students
1.
Guidelines for Supervisory
Arrangements
2.
Abolition of Second-Year
Post-Examination Board Progress Committees
3.
Anonymised Mark Grids and
Extenuating Circumstances
4.
Overseas Relations Annual
Report
1.
Code of Practice on
Teaching by Graduate Students
(a)
Selection Procedures (S.MM.26-32/01)
|
26/01 |
‘The Senate noted that the recommendation relating to
the formality of feedback to Graduate Teaching Assistants (GTAs) not selected
for teaching after interview (ASC.M.433/00) had been referred back to the
Sub-Committee on Teaching by Graduate Students. The Sub-Committee would consult further
with departments with a view to recommending approval of a mechanism for giving
feedback that was robust but not excessively burdensome.
|
27/01 |
Concern was expressed about the requirement to inform
GTAs who were not selected or whose contracts were not renewed that they could
request feedback, when the Sub-Committee had not yet produced guidelines for the provision of
feedback. The Dean of the Graduate
School reported that the Sub-Committee was meeting later on the same day to
discuss this issue and that the guidelines would be available in the Summer
term.
|
28/01 |
The Head of the Department of Mathematics expressed concern that the elaborate procedures
set out in the Code of Practice were inappropriate for departments with small
numbers of GTAs. The Dean of the
Graduate School agreed to discuss with Professor Holt how procedures in the Code
of Practice could be adjusted to meet the needs of such
departments.
|
29/01 |
The President of the Students’ Union expressed concern
that the statement in the Code of Practice (paragraph (6)(i)) that ‘Departments
should ensure that all new GTAs undertake a Staff Development Office training
course’ suggested that this was optional rather than a requirement. The Vice-Chancellor confirmed that
departments were required to ensure that GTAs had undertaken appropriate
training and that the wording in the Code of Practice should be interpreted in
this light.
|
30/01 |
RESOLVED: (i) that
departments be required to provide feedback to GTAs not selected for teaching
following an interview where requested by the applicant;
|
31/01 |
(ii) that
departments be required to inform all candidates invited to interview for
appointment as GTAs of their right to request feedback in the event of their
application being unsuccessful;
|
32/01 |
(iii) that the Code of
Practice on Teaching by Graduate Students be approved as set out in Appendix A’
attached.
(b) Feedback
on SAT Questionnaires (ASC.M.116/01)
‘RESOLVED:
|
116/01 |
(a) that Heads
of Department be asked to ensure feedback to all their GTAs on SAT
questionnaires’.
SECTION B – FOR INFORMATION
1.
Guidelines for
Supervisory Arrangements (S.M.35/01)
Revised Guidelines for Supervisory Arrangements
were approved by the Senate at its meeting on 21 March 2001, as set out in
Appendix B attached.
Amendments to the University
Progress Procedures were approved by the Senate at its meeting on 21 March 2001,
as set out in Appendix C attached.
3.
Anonymised Mark
Grids and Extenuating Circumstances (ASC.M.72/01)
4.
Overseas Relations
Annual Report (APC.MM.39-45/01)
|
39/01 |
Attention was drawn to part of
the report highlighting occasions where departments were slow in responding to
applications. This was considered to be a matter of significant
concern.
|
40/01 |
Delays in the processing of
applications may arise because a department is not adequately staffed, in which
case Budget Sub-Committee would respond positively, or because staff are not
appropriately deployed. It was agreed that it was essential that systems should
be in place to prevent delays in the processing of applications through staff
absence or illness. The Committee considered that significant delays probably
also arose because academic decisions were not being made quickly enough.
|
41/01 |
The Dean of the Graduate School
commented that departments were gradually moving to an online system for
applications and that the numbers being processed were growing all the time. It
was noted that all departments will be able to receive applications online by
September 2001, which will increase the volume of applications but would also
improve the efficiency of processing. The Dean of the Graduate School agreed to
take a proactive role in anticipation of the full introduction of online
applications and to monitor its progress and any associated
problems.
|
42/01 |
The Committee discussed
examples of good practice within departments and agreed that some centralisation
of decision making was usually more effective than dispersal of responsibility,
which tended to make coordination difficult, although the latter allowed
individual scheme directors to give more attention to applications.
|
43/01 |
It was noted that the
Department of Government charged for applications and that transferring some of
the cost of processing applications to applicants could have benefits.
(Applicants who subsequently enrolled as students were refunded.) It was agreed
that this would deter frivolous applications but might also be off-putting to
serious candidates. It was agreed that the Dean of the Graduate School would
pursue the issues of charging and application processing with graduate
secretaries, graduate directors and possibly the Graduate School
Board.
|
44/01 |
It was noted that one aim of
the graduate application database was to allow the monitoring of turnaround
times, although not all departments were using the database yet. It was agreed
that responsibility for the monitoring of turnaround times should rest with the
Graduate Admissions Office.
|
45/01 |
While the Committee did not
wish to be too prescriptive, it emphasised the importance of efficiency of
processing and the following as examples of good practice:
·
The setting of a target
for maximum turnaround time. (The question was raised whether a target of 21
days, as recommended by the Harloe report, was too long.)
·
Immediate acknowledgement
of applications, informing applicants of when a response should be
expected.
·
Clear processes within
departments, which may include regular meetings to consider applicants, and the
use of reminders, to ensure academic decisions are made
quickly.’
FOR
ACTION:
Heads
of Department
Directors
of
Centre for Psychoanalytic Studies
Centre for Theatre Studies
Human Rights Centre
Pan-European Institute
Centre for Theoretical Studies
FOR
INFORMATION:
Vice-Chancellor
Pro-Vice-Chancellors
Deans
Academic
Registrar
Academic
Section Administrators
Departmental
Executive Officers (including Centres listed above)
Executive
Officer, Socrates Office
CODE OF PRACTICE ON TEACHING
BY GRADUATE STUDENTS (GTAs)
(a) Selection
(i)
Vacancies for GTAs/demonstrators should be advertised in departments and
a person specification provided.
(ii) All
short-listed GTAs should be interviewed by the Head of Department or his/her nominee, and one other member
of teaching staff, before initial
appointment.
(iii) Where teaching
duties are linked to a bursary, selection should be made on the basis of both
research and teaching potential.
(iv) Feedback should
be provided on candidates' interview performance and suitability for the GTA
role on request, after the selection process is complete, and all candidates
invited to interview should be informed of their entitlement to request
feedback.
(b) Training
and development of GTAs
(i)
Departments should ensure that all new GTAs undertake a Staff Development
Office training course, or an alternative programme of training proposed by the
Head of Department and approved in writing by the University Staff Development
Officer.
(ii) Training
for GTAs (wherever delivered) should include training in sensitivity to cultural
issues, including language and special needs.
(iii) Departments
should normally provide a handbook on teaching arrangements within the
department for GTAs.
(iv) Early in each
academic year departments should organise a briefing meeting for new GTAs,
providing formal induction on departmental teaching and assessment practices, student progress
procedures, the role of the graduate student teacher and guidance on
academic content. At this meeting or separately departments should provide
appropriate training on health and safety.
.
(v) Departments
should normally hold, at the end of the Autumn term and at the end of each
academic year, a seminar/workshop for GTAs, aimed at sharing good practice and
providing a preliminary induction for potential new GTAs.
(vi) Departments should
maintain systems for monitoring the quality of teaching by GTAs, which should
include documented observation of teaching, the dates of observations and names
of observers to be held on departmental records. Each GTA should be allocated a
mentor, normally the relevant
course/module supervisor.
(vii) Departments should keep
the Staff Development Office informed of any emerging training needs of GTAs.
(viii)
Departments should encourage and
support GTAs who may wish to develop portfolios for accreditation.
(c)
Teaching duties
(i)
Teaching should normally
be class teaching or demonstrating; lecturing duties must be associated with a
student's research interest, and require prior approval from the Dean of the
Graduate School and the Dean of the Undergraduate School in which the teaching
will be conducted.
(ii) Where
graduate students teachers are asked to have office hours, they should be paid
appropriately and provided with a suitable room.
(d) Departmental
organisation
(i)
Departments should make every effort to ensure the integration of GTAs
into course teaching teams, and their inclusion in the information and
communication networks appropriate to their role as team members.
(ii) GTAs should
be represented at departmental meetings where there is discussion on teaching
issues.
(iii) Wherever
possible, GTAs should be listed alongside academic staff in course details,
reading lists and departmental booklets and included on staff e-mail lists and
lists of office hours.
(iv) GTAs should be provided
with appropriate resources to carry out their teaching
duties.
Appendix
B
Section 7 (i) of the Guidelines
currently specifies that the documentation supplied by departments to new
research students on admission should include "a general statement of the
supervisor's responsibilities".
It is proposed that Section 7
(i) be augmented to read as follows:
“a
general statement of the supervisor’s responsibilities, which shall include:
a.
Maintaining regular contact with the student through such meetings as are
agreed with the student at meetings of the Supervisory Board and by setting
aside further times when he/she will be available (keeping the student
well-informed in advance of any prolonged absences from the
University).
b.
Maintaining on a standard form a record of dates of meetings with the
student, which can be produced later if necessary.
c.
Convening meetings of the Supervisory Board (at least twice a year for
full-time students and once a year for all other students, as well as more
frequently when appropriate and/or when determined by the department’s Research
Students Progress Committee) where appropriate, co-ordinating contact with such
associate supervisors as may be appointed.
d.
Providing guidance about the nature and standard of research work
expected, and advice on attaining that standard, together with advice on
academic practice in the discipline including health and safety and ethical
issues.
e.
Facilitating meetings between the student to meet and other researchers
in the field (including opportunities to present work to staff and fellow
postgraduates and for attendance and participation in appropriate seminars and
conferences).
f.
Requesting written work and oral presentations as appropriate and
commenting on such work within reasonable time; keeping a record of all work
submitted with dates of submission and when this received a response (in
discussion and/or in writing) – which can be produced later if
necessary.
g.
Submitting reports on the student’s progress in accordance with the
university and departmental Supervisory Guidelines.
h.
Warning and advising students where work is not of the appropriate
standard, and of steps which might be taken to remedy the
situation.
i.
Advising the Supervisory Board, and as necessary the departmental
Research Students Progress Committee, where the supervisor believes that the
student is unlikely to reach the standard for the degree for which he/she is
registered.”
Appendix C
AMENDMENTS TO UNIVERSITY PROGRESS PROCEDURES
CONSEQUENTIAL UPON THE ABOLITION OF SECOND YEAR POST-EXAMINATION BOARD PROGRESS
COMMITTEES
5. The
Operation of Progress Procedures After Undergraduate Examinations for First
Years* and First and Second Years Students* in the
School of Law
* For these
purposes Levels 1 and 2 in the Department of ESE and Foundation Years
taught away are considered First Year schemes.
5.1. The Board of each
School will previously have drawn up within the provisions of the principal
regulations for the degree of BA, BSc, BEng, LLB, MPhys., MMathSci. or
MEng. criteria for deciding what constitutes passing the first or second
year.
5.2. In June the Board of
Examiners Examinations
Committee** sees the marks of each candidate and in the light of these
marks, and any other relevant information, makes one of the progress
decisions set out in paragraph 5.3 below in respect of each
student:
**the term
Board of Examiners is also taken to mean Examinations
Committee
**Examinations Committee is
also taken to mean the Board of Examiners for second year students in the School
of Law
5.3 The following
progress decisions can be taken by the Examinations Committee
Board of Examiners:
i)
to permit the candidate to proceed to the next year of a scheme of study
as appropriate;
ii)
to require the candidate
to resit, at the next available opportunity in September, the
examination(s) in the subject(s) in which he or she has failed to satisfy the
examiners. Where the next opportunity to resit is the following academic year
the student will resit without attendance in the interim period.
iii) to require
the candidate to resit the examinations(s) in the following academic year
without attendance in the interim period;
iiiiv) to require the
candidate to repeat the year of study.
The Examinations Committee Board of Examiners may attach
such conditions to its decision as seem likely to assist the future progression
of the candidate;
iv) to set
other conditions, such as the submission of outstanding or additional coursework
or project work;
vi) in
exceptional circumstances to condone a failure in one or more courses, or deem
that a candidate has passed one or several specific papers and be permitted to
proceed to the next year of the appropriate scheme or another scheme specified
by the Examinations Committee Board of Examiners. In these cases the Examinations
Committees Board of Examiners may attach such conditions to its
decision as seems likely to assist the future progress of the
candidate;
vii) to require the
candidate to withdraw.
5.4. The procedures
following the September resit examinations will be the same as in June except
that the Examinations Committee Board of Examiners sees both the
June and the September marks of each candidate and in the light of these marks,
and any other relevant information, makes one of the decisions outlined in
paragraph 5.3 above in respect of each student, with the exception of
paragraph 5.3 (ii).
5.5. The Examinations
Committee Board of Examiners shall consider matters of extenuating
circumstances. If the extenuating
circumstances are of such a nature that a final decision cannot be reached
without further investigation then the student should be referred to the
Dean.
5.6. A student may appeal
against the decision of an Examinations Committee Board of Examiners in accordance
with the procedures set out in section 13 of this
document.
6. The
Operation of Progress Procedures After Undergraduate Examinations for Second
Years outside the School of Law*
* Second year Law students should see section 5
above.
6.1. The Chair of a Board of
Examiners for a scheme of study may refer to the appropriate Dean any case of
unsatisfactory progress arising from second-year examinations, or third year
students who are following a four-year scheme, whether or not the marks awarded
contribute directly towards the final degree
assessment.
6.2. The Chair of a Board of
Examiners shall refer the student to the Progress Committee if the student's
results are such that he or she would not be able to obtain a degree at the end
of the final year. If the Progress
Committee obtains information about extenuating circumstances which was
unavailable to the Board of Examiners then the Progress Committee can recommend
that the final year Board of Examiners be asked to take the extenuating
circumstances into account.
(See section 10 below for the powers of Progress
Committee)
6
The Operation of Progress Procedures for Students on Degree Schemes with
a Year Abroad
6.1 All degree
schemes for which the Year Abroad comprises part of the assessment for the
degree should have a meeting of a sub-committee of the Board of Examiners
following the year spent abroad. The meeting should consider Year Abroad marks
and extenuating circumstances affecting the year abroad work and confirm marks
to be forwarded to the Final Year Board of Examiners.
6.2 The sub-committee
also has the power to refer a student to the Dean or to a Progress Committee in
the case of unsatisfactory progress or if the students results are such that he
or she would not be able to obtain a degree at the end of the final
year.
6.3
Where
Year Abroad students are referred to a Progress Committee the Committee will be
able to take any of the decisions set out in paragraph 10.1
below.
7.
Referral To Progress Committee
7.1. If the Dean of a School
or a Board of Examiners refers the case of a student to Progress
Committee then the Undergraduate Schools Office or Graduate School Office as
appropriate will write to inform the student and will copy the letter to the
student's department Adviser/Supervisor and Senior Adviser in the case
of undergraduate students.
7.2. The student should be
given adequate time to seek advice and prepare his or her case before the
meeting of the Progress Committee, although it is acknowledged that time will be
limited when dealing with referrals consequent upon examination
results.
7.3. The letter to the
student will indicate the reason for the referral to the Progress
Committee.
7.4. The student will be
invited to attend the meeting and may be accompanied by any member of the
University or by a member of the full-time staff of the Students' Union.
7.5. If the student is
unable to attend the meeting of Progress Committee, the meeting will
nevertheless take place and the decisions taken will be
valid.
7.6. A student who is unable
to attend the meeting can ask a member of the University or a member of the
full-time staff of the Student Union to attend on his or her behalf. No person can represent the student in
his or her absence unless he or she has expressly been asked to do so by the
student.
7.7. The student will be
invited to submit in advance the following documents:
(a) a written
statement giving any facts or extenuating circumstances (see section 11of this
document) which the student thinks may have affected his or her
performance;
(b) documentary
evidence to support any extenuating circumstances put forward, without which the
information may be disregarded by the Progress Committee.
10. Powers of
Progress Committee
10.1 After consideration of
the case, the Progress Committee will make one of the following
decisions:
a) that
the student be permitted to proceed, with or without specific
conditions;
b) that
the student be required to withdraw permanently.
In certain circumstances the Progress Committee may deem it appropriate
to offer the student one of the following options:
c) to
re-sit the examinations and/or submit coursework for some or all courses, with
or without residence;
cd) to permit the student to repeat an
appropriate period of study, including all or part of a period of study
abroad.
d)
permit the student to transfer to another appropriate degree
scheme.
Progress Committee may also attach such conditions as
seem likely to assist the future progress of the
student.
13 Procedure
for Appeals against the Progress Decision of a Foundation, First
or Second Year Board of Examiners* Examinations
Committee
This procedure will also apply to Foundation year students and second
year students on specified schemes of study which permit September resit
examinations.
*The term Board of Examiners is also taken to mean Examination
Committee
Right Of
Appeal
13.1 A student has the right
to appeal against the progress decision of a First or Second Year
Board of Examiners an Examinations Committee on designated
grounds. The appeal must be submitted within ten working days of the publication of
results. The designated grounds on which a student may appeal are:
a.
Extenuating circumstances
of which the Board of Examiners Examinations Committee was unaware
and of which the student could not reasonably have been expected to inform the
Board Committee in advance, of such a nature as to cause
reasonable doubt as to whether the result might have been different had they not
occurred;
b. Procedural irregularities
in the conduct of the Board of Examiners Examinations Committee
(including alleged administrative error) of such a nature as to cause reasonable
doubt as to whether the result might have been different had they not occurred.
13.2 A student may not
appeal against the academic judgement of examiners. Coursework and examinations
will not be re-marked except in a case of procedural
irregularity.
Consultation
With The Dean* Of School
*The Dean of the student's School of Study shall take
the actions described under these procedures whether or not the Dean is Chair of
the Board of Examiners responsible for the decision against which the student is
appealing.
13.3 For Students Who Are
Required To Withdraw Permanently
a.
A student who has been
required to withdraw permanently from the University and who is considering an
appeal is advised to consult the Dean of his or her School of Study. The Dean
has the power to take Chair's action on behalf of the Examinations
Committee Board of Examiners to change the original decision if the
student presents appropriate new evidence to support his or her case.
b. If the student wishes to
see the Dean, he or she will be entitled to do so, and the student should
contact the Undergraduate Schools Office as soon as possible to make an
appointment. When seeing the Dean, the student may be accompanied by any member
of the University or by a member of the full-time staff of the Students' Union.
If the student is unable to attend such a meeting then it may be possible to
telephone the Dean at a pre-arranged time.
c. The Dean will explain to
the student the basis on which the Examinations Committee Board of
Examiners made its decision. The student will have the opportunity to
discuss his or her case and present relevant new information. The Dean may wish
to consult members of the Board of Examiners or other members of academic
staff before reaching a final decision. The Dean will then decide whether or not
to change the original decision of the Examinations Committee Board of
Examiners and will inform the student accordingly. If, after consultation
with the Dean, the student still wishes to appeal, and believes he or she has
grounds, the student must submit a formal appeal in writing in accordance with
the procedure set out below.
13.4 For Students Who Wish
To Appeal Against Other Decisions Of The Foundation, First or Second Year
Board of Examiners Examinations Committee
a.
A student who has not been
required to withdraw permanently but who wishes to appeal against a lesser
another decision of the Examinations Committee Board of
Examiners should write to the Dean of his or her School of Study, giving
full details of his or her case. The Dean has the power to take Chair's
action on behalf of the Examinations Committee Board of Examiners
to change the original decision if the student presents appropriate new
evidence to support his or her case.
b. The Dean may wish to
consult members of the Board of Examiners or other members of academic
staff before reaching a final decision. The Dean will contact the student if any
additional information or evidence is required from the student. The Dean will
then decide whether or not to change the original decision of the
Examinations Committee Board of Examiners and will inform the
student accordingly. If, after consultation with the Dean, the student still
wishes to appeal, and believes he or she has grounds , the student must submit a
formal appeal in writing in accordance with the procedure set out below.
Procedure For
Formal Appeal
13.5 The student must write
to the Academic Registrar stating fully and precisely the grounds for appeal,
within fifteen working days of the original publication of the results. The
Academic Registrar will acknowledge receipt of the appeal within five working
days, and will refer the appeal to the Appeals Officer. The Appeals Officer will
decide whether or not the appeal meets the designated grounds for
appeal.
13.6
If the Appeals Officer
decides that the appeal does not meet the designated grounds, the Academic
Registrar will inform the student in writing, stating the basis for the Appeals
Officer's decision, which is final. The communication of this decision shall, in
such cases, constitute the formal dismissal of the appeal.
13.7
If the Appeals Officer
decides that prima facie the appeal
meets the designated grounds, s/he will forward it to the Dean of the School,
together with his or her written comments, to be referred to the School Appeals
Committee.
School
Appeals Committee
13.8
The Dean of the School
will convene a School Appeals Committee, which will normally consist of a Head
of Department (who will chair the meeting) and two other members of academic
staff, none of whom should be from the student's department or Area (or
departments in the case of joint schemes), selected by the Dean from a panel
approved annually by the Board of the School, together with a senior member of
staff who is from the student's department or Area (or departments in the case
of joint schemes). No member of staff who was a member of the original
Examinations Committee Board of Examiners for the student in
question may be a member of the Appeal Committee. The quorum for a School
Examination Appeals Committee is four.
13.9
The student will be
invited to attend the meeting of the School Appeals Committee and may be
accompanied by any member of the University or by a member of the full-time
staff of the Students' Union. When the student is accompanied by his or her
Adviser or another member of academic staff, it must be noted that the staff
member is present to act as the student's advocate and for no other reason. If
the student is unable to attend the meeting of the Appeal Committee, the meeting
will nevertheless take place and the decision made will be valid. A student who
is unable to attend the meeting can ask a member of the University or a member
of the full-time staff of the Student Union to attend on his or her
behalf.
13.10
The student will receive a
copy of all the papers that are presented to the Appeals Committee. The papers
will be available to the student when they are available to members of the
Appeal Committee, normally in advance of the meeting. At the student’s request,
copies of confidential papers will be withheld from members of the Appeals
Committee, in which case the Chair may inform the Committee of the existence and
general import of the documents without divulging the details.
The Appeals Committee will be able to make any decision
which was open to the original Examinations Committee Board of
Examiners and may attach such conditions to its decision as seem likely to
assist the future progress of the student. The decision of the Appeal Committee
is final. It may be communicated orally to the student at the conclusion of the
meeting. Formal notification of the outcome will be sent to the student in every
case.
14. Procedures for
Appeals Against Second or Final Year Results
14.1.
A student who wishes to complain against a second year or final result
(or third year result in respect of students on a four year scheme of study) of
a degree, diploma or certificate scheme of study must do so in writing on the
Form of Appeal, stating fully and precisely the grounds for complaint, within
four weeks of publication of the results. Guidelines for the benefit of students
are attached. Forms of Appeal are available from the Academic Registrar,
Undergraduate Schools Office, Graduate School or Departmental Offices. A second year student who wishes to
complain against a progress decision of the Board of Examiners (e.g. being
required to withdraw, repeat the year, or resit examinations) should do so in
accordance with the Procedures for Appeals against a Progress decision of a
First or Second Year Board of Examiners within 10 days of the publication of the
results.
14.2.
Any other officer of the University who receives a formal complaint from
a student concerning his/her final result shall forward it to the Academic
Registrar. The Academic Registrar
will acknowledge the appeal within five working days of
receipt.
14.3.
Any such complaint will be considered by the Appeals Officer, who may
consult such persons as he/she thinks fit, including the student who has lodged
the complaint, in arriving at a decision as to whether or not the complaint is
well-founded.
14.4.
The Appeals Officer will conduct the investigation as quickly as possible
but, particularly during the summer vacation, there may be unavoidable
delays. The Academic Registrar will
write to the student within six weeks of receipt about the progress of the
complaint and will let the student know when he or she can expect to receive a
decision.
14.5.
If the Appeals Officer decides that there are not sufficient prima facie
grounds for putting the case to the Board of Examiners, the Academic Registrar
will inform the student in writing, stating the reasons for the decision. The communication of this decision
shall, in such cases, constitute the formal dismissal of the complaint.
14.6.
If the Appeals Officer decides there are sufficient prima facie grounds
for putting the case to the Board of Examiners, he/she will forward it, together
with his/her written comments, to the Dean of the student's School of Study. The
Academic Registrar will inform the student, and will subsequently let the
student know when the Board of Examiners will meet to reconsider the case. On receipt of the complaint and the
Appeals Officer's comments, the Dean shall cause the Board of Examiners
responsible for the assessment against which the student has complained to
reconvene and put before the Board the student's submission, the Appeals
Officer's comments and any material relevant to the original assessment. The
Dean will then formally ask the Board to review its decision. The Appeals
Officer will have the right to attend and to address the meeting of the Board of
Examiners.
14.7 If the Appeals Officer
decides to uphold an appeal by a Second Year student on the grounds of
extenuating circumstances of which the Board of Examiners was unaware and of
which the student could not reasonably have been expected to inform the Board of
Examiners in advance, the Appeals Officer will decide whether it is appropriate
to ask the Dean to reconvene the Board of Examiners. If it is the Appeals Officer's view that
the likely outcome of such a meeting would be that the Board of Examiners would
decide either that the extenuating circumstances should be carried forward to
the final year Board, or that the extenuating circumstances would not have a
material effect on the results, then the Appeals Officer will not ask the Dean
to reconvene the Board. However
s/he will ensure that the Dean is fully apprised of the extenuating
circumstances so that they can be placed before the Board of Examiners in the
student's final year.
14.8.
The Dean of the student's School of Study shall take the actions
described in paragraph 6 above, whether or not the Dean is Chair of the Board of
Examiners responsible for the assessment against which the student has
complained.
14.9.
In causing a Board of Examiners to reconvene, the Dean may, at his or her
discretion, consult by telephone or in writing any internal or external examiner
who is unable to attend the reconvened
meeting of the Board.
14.10. If,
following review of its decision, the Board of Examiners is satisfied that there
is no reason to amend its original decision the Dean will so inform the Academic
Registrar in writing, giving the Board's reasons for reaffirming its original
decision and its comments, if any, on the grounds for complaint stated by the
student.
14.11. If,
following review of its decision, the Board of Examiners concludes that its
original decision was wholly or partly incorrect to the extent that it decides
to amend a mark or classification previously awarded, the Dean will so inform
the Academic Registrar in writing and advise him/her of the amended mark or
classification.
14.12. The
decision of the Board of Examiners following review will be communicated in
writing to the student by the Academic Registrar stating the grounds for the
decision. The communication of the decision shall in all cases constitute the
formal conclusion of action taken in accordance with these procedures.
14.13
Guidelines for undergraduate or taught-course postgraduate students
considering an appeal against the decision of an examination board in respect of
a second year, third year or final result of a degree, diploma or certificate
scheme of study
The main legitimate grounds for appeal are the
following:
1.
Extenuating circumstances of which the Board of Examiners was unaware and
of which the student could not reasonably have been expected to inform the Board
of Examiners in advance, of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to
whether the result might have been different had they not
occurred.
2.
Procedural irregularities in the conduct of the Board of Examiners
(including alleged administrative error) of such a nature as to cause reasonable
doubt as to whether the result might have been different had they not
occurred.
Other grounds will be considered on their merits,
but the following are not considered legitimate grounds on which to appeal, and
any appeals based exclusively on one or more of these grounds will be rejected
automatically:
(a)
Appeals against the academic judgement of internal or external
examiners. Coursework and
examinations cannot be remarked, except in cases of procedural
irregularities.
(b)
Informal assessments of the student's work by members of academic
staff.
(c)
The retrospective reporting of extenuating circumstances which a student
might reasonably have been expected to disclose to the Board of Examiners before
their meeting.
(d)
Marginal failure to attain a higher class of degree.
C:\My Documents\asc papers\appeals against final
results procs - dec 2000.doc
14. Procedures for
Appeals Against Second or Final Year Results Examination Board Appeals
Procedures
14.1.
A student who wishes to complain against a second year or final result
(or third year result in respect of students on a four year scheme of study) of
a degree, diploma or certificate scheme of study must do so in writing on the
Form of Appeal, stating fully and precisely the grounds for complaint, within
four weeks of publication of the results. Guidelines for the benefit of students
are attached. Forms of Appeal are available from the Academic Registrar,
Undergraduate Schools Office, Graduate School or Departmental Offices. A
second year student who wishes to complain against a progress decision of the
Board of Examiners (e.g. being required to withdraw, repeat the year, or resit
examinations) should do so in accordance with the Procedures for Appeals against
a Progress decision of a First or Second Year Board of Examiners within 10 days
of the publication of results.
14.2. Any other officer of the University
who receives a formal complaint from a student concerning his/her final result
shall forward it to the Academic Registrar. The Academic Registrar will acknowledge
the appeal within five working days of receipt.
14.3.
Any such complaint will be considered by the Appeals Officer, who may
consult such persons as he/she thinks fit, including the student who has lodged
the complaint, in arriving at a decision as to whether or not the complaint is
well-founded.
14.4.
The Appeals Officer will conduct the investigation as quickly as possible
but, particularly during the summer vacation, there may be unavoidable
delays. The Academic Registrar will
write to the student within six weeks of receipt about the progress of the
complaint and will let the student know when he or she can expect to receive a
decision.
14.5.
If the Appeals Officer decides that there are not sufficient prima facie
grounds for putting the case to the Board of Examiners, the Academic Registrar
will inform the student in writing, stating the reasons for the decision. The communication of this decision
shall, in such cases, constitute the formal dismissal of the complaint.
14.6.
If the Appeals Officer decides there are sufficient prima facie grounds
for putting the case to the Board of Examiners, he/she will forward it, together
with his/her written comments, to the Dean of the student's School of Study. The
Academic Registrar will inform the student, and will subsequently let the
student know when the Board of Examiners will meet to reconsider the case. On receipt of the complaint and the
Appeals Officer's comments, the Dean shall cause the Board of Examiners
responsible for the assessment against which the student has complained to
reconvene and put before the Board the student's submission, the Appeals
Officer's comments and any material relevant to the original assessment. The
Dean will then formally ask the Board to review its decision. The Appeals
Officer will have the right to attend and to address the meeting of the Board of
Examiners.
14.7 If the Appeals Office
decides to uphold an appeal by a Second Year student on the grounds of
extenuating circumstances of which the Board of Examiners was unaware and of
which the student could not reasonably have been expected to inform the Board of
Examiners in advance, the Appeals Officer will decide whether it is appropriate
to ask the Dean to reconvene the Board of Examiners. If it is the Appeals
Officer’s view that the likely outcome of such a meeting would be that the Board
of Examiners would decide whether that the extenuating circumstances should be
carried forward to the final year Board, or that the extenuating circumstances
would not have a material effect on their results, then the Appeals Officer will
not ask the Dean the reconvene the Board. However s/he will ensure that the Dean
is fully apprised of the extenuating circumstances so that they can be placed
before the Board of Examiners in the student’s final
year.
14.78. The Dean of the student's School of Study shall
take the actions described in paragraph 6 above, whether or not the Dean is
Chair of the Board of Examiners responsible for the assessment against which the
student has complained.
14.89 In causing a Board of Examiners to
reconvene, the Dean may, at his or her discretion, consult by telephone or in
writing any internal or external examiner who is unable to attend the
reconvened meeting of the Board.
14.910
If, following review of its decision, the Board of Examiners is satisfied
that there is no reason to amend its original decision the Dean will so inform
the Academic Registrar in writing, giving the Board's reasons for reaffirming
its original decision and its comments, if any, on the grounds for complaint
stated by the student.
14.1011If, following review of its
decision, the Board of Examiners concludes that its original decision was wholly
or partly incorrect to the extent that it decides to amend a mark or
classification previously awarded, the Dean will so inform the Academic
Registrar in writing and advise him/her of the amended mark or classification.
14.1112The decision of the Board of
Examiners following review will be communicated in writing to the student by the
Academic Registrar stating the grounds for the decision. The communication of
the decision shall in all cases constitute the formal conclusion of action taken
in accordance with these procedures.
14.1213Guidelines for undergraduate or
taught-course postgraduate students considering an appeal against the decision
of an examination board in respect of a second year, third year or final result
of a degree, diploma or certificate scheme of study
The main legitimate grounds for appeal are the
following:
1.
Extenuating circumstances of which the Board of Examiners was unaware and
of which the student could not reasonably have been expected to inform the Board
of Examiners in advance, of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to
whether the result might have been different had they not
occurred.
2.
Procedural irregularities in the conduct of the Board of Examiners
(including alleged administrative error) of such a nature as to cause reasonable
doubt as to whether the result might have been different had they not
occurred.
Other grounds will be considered on their merits, but
the following are not considered legitimate grounds on which to appeal, and any
appeals based exclusively on one or more of these grounds will be rejected
automatically:
(a)
Appeals against the academic judgement of internal or external
examiners. Coursework and
examinations cannot be remarked, except in cases of procedural
irregularities.
(b)
Informal assessments of the student's work by members of academic
staff.
(c)
The retrospective reporting of extenuating circumstances which a student
might reasonably have been expected to disclose to the Board of Examiners before
their meeting.
(d)
Marginal failure to attain a higher class of
degree.