ACADEMIC SECTION INFORMATION NOTE |
2000-01 |
N17 |
|
From: |
Joanne Tallentire,
Assistant Registrar |
23 July
2001 |
This information note refers to
decisions made at the following meetings:
APC – 23 May
2001
Senate – 13 June
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.
Attendance and Progress
Monitoring for Undergraduate Students
2.
Code of Practice for
Student Representation within Departments
3.
Choice of External
Examiners and Nomination Arrangements
4.
Academic Offences – New
Procedures
5.
Confidentiality of SAC/T
Results
6.
Code of Practice on
Teaching by GTAs – Job Specification
SECTION B – FOR INFORMATION
1.
New Degree Scheme Proposal
Form
2.
SAT and SAC - Future
Developments
3.
Revised Progress
Procedures
4.
Revised Guidelines for the
Use of IT Facilities
5.
New Regulation –
Communication with Students
6.
Proposals for New PGT
Collaborative Programmes
7.
Abolition of Academic
Policy Committee
(a)
Attendance and
Progress Monitoring for Undergraduate Students
(S.MM.155-162/01)
|
155/01 |
‘RESOLVED:
(i)
that departments should be required to input the attendance of first year
students at supporting tuition, i.e. classes, tutorials, laboratories, on the
COR system during weeks 4 – 6 so that the School can review the attendance of
first year students in the Autumn Term.
|
156/01 |
(ii) that departments should continue to be responsible for
monitoring the attendance and progress of second and final year students with
Heads of Department having the primary responsibility for taking action where
students’ attendance and/or progress are unsatisfactory. (This task may be delegated to one or
more members of departmental staff, e.g. Undergraduate Director of
Studies.) Departments may wish to
use the COR system for recording attendance, in order that the data is also
available in a consistent and accessible format for the Dean. However, as a minimum departments should
satisfy themselves that:
(a) in the Autumn term (e.g. weeks 5- 6),
students are enrolled for the correct number of courses, that these are
appropriate to the students’ scheme of study, and that they are attending these
courses; and
(b) from the beginning of the Spring term (e.g.
weeks 12 - 13), students have submitted the required pieces of coursework
and are performing satisfactorily.
|
157/01 |
(iii) that when second
and/or third year students are referred to the Dean, s/he will not normally
arrange to see the student.
Instead, the Dean will write to the student informing him/her of the
gravity of the situation and that s/he may fail the year of study. Students will
be offered the opportunity to discuss their situation with the
Dean.
|
158/01 |
(iv) that students
should not be referred to Progress Committee during the summer term, but where
there is prima facie evidence that
they cannot pass the year or their degree successfully they should be sent a
warning letter. Examination Boards
for second year students now have the same powers as Progress Committees and can
therefore deal with the student's case after the results are
known.
|
159/01 |
Regulation 6.11 should therefore be amended as follows (deleted wording
crossed through, new wording underlined):
“Heads of Department, or in the case of students
following joint schemes of study, the Director of the scheme, shall inform the
Dean of the School concerned of any student whose performance suggests that
prima facie the student will be unable to meet the requirements for obtaining a
pass at the end of the year. The
cases of such students will normally be referred to the Progress Committee of
the Board of the School. It shall
be open to the Progress Committee to refuse to allow entry to an examination to
any student who it is satisfied is unable to meet the requirements for obtaining
the degree for which he or she is registered dealt with by the Dean of
the School who will normally write to the students to warn them of the gravity
of their situation and the likelihood that they will fail the year or the degree
for which they are registered.”
|
160/01 |
(v) that there
should be an absolute, University-wide deadline for the submission of any
coursework for students who have been given an extension beyond the normal
departmental deadline. The final deadline should be 4 p.m. on Friday of week 23
(or the working day one week immediately prior to the first day of the
examination period)1;
1 Students missing the final
University-wide deadline for coursework submission would be advised to submit an
extenuating circumstances in accordance with the existing
procedure.
|
161/01 |
(vi) that coursework
deadlines should always be set by departments and not Schools, and extensions
beyond the standard deadline up to the University deadline should be granted by
the Head of Department or his/her nominee and not by the
Dean;
|
162/01 |
(vii) that there should be a
final deadline for the submission of requests for permission to intermit in the
first and second years (a deadline for final years already exists in Regulation
5.17). The deadline should be 4
p.m. on Friday in week 22 (or the working day two weeks immediately prior to the
first day of the examination period).’
(b)
Code of Practice
for Student Representation within Departments
(S.M.145/01)
The Senate resolved that the
existing Code of Practice on Staff-Student Liaison Committees be replaced by a
Code of Practice for Student Representation within Departments, as set out in
Appendix A attached.
(c)
Choice of External
Examiners and Nomination Arrangements (S.M.146/01)
The Senate approved revised sections of the
Procedures for the Administration of the External Examiner System as
follows:
Choice of External Examiners
The provisions below may be
varied, at the discretion of the relevant Dean of School, to deal with cases
(especially in small subjects) where there is particular difficulty in
identifying suitable individuals willing to serve as External
Examiners.
It is the responsibility of
the nominating department to check that a proposed External Examiner meets all
the criteria for selection listed below. Where the criteria are not fully met, a
written case for an exception must be submitted with the nomination form for
consideration by the relevant Dean.
4.1 The Senate has,
as a matter of longstanding policy, stressed the desirability of using senior
academics, particularly Professors, as External Examiners.
4.2 External
Examiners with no previous experience of the role shall not normally be
appointed as Scheme Examiners where they are the sole External Examiner for the
scheme.
4.3 No previous
student or previous member of the academic staff of the University, or its
partner organisations may be appointed as an External Examiner unless at least
five years have elapsed between leaving the staff or ceasing to be a student and
the first day of the academic year in which he or she is to act as External
Examiner.
4.4 A Department
nominating an External Examiner for appointment, and an External Examiner
accepting appointment, shall confirm formally that there is no conflict of
interest, arising from personal or family relationships, or from other direct
ties to members of staff or students.
4.5 A Department may
not nominate a taught scheme External Examiner from another Department in which
a member of the staff of the University of Essex is currently serving in a
similar capacity.
4.6 A Department may
not nominate an External Examiner for appointment if this would lead to the
Department’s having either two Undergraduate External Examiners, or two Taught
Postgraduate External Examiners, from the same University.
4.7 A Department may
not nominate a new External Examiner to succeed another from the same
institution.
4.8 External
Examiners should normally reside in the UK. Approval to appoint an examiner from
outside the UK will be granted only exceptionally.
4.9 External
Examiners are asked to confirm that they hold no more than one other appointment
as External Examiner, and that they undertake to maintain this position for the
period of their appointment to the University of Essex.
4.10 Departments are
encouraged to use one External Examiner for several schemes to avoid the
appointment of a sole External Examiner for small schemes, according to the
rules below:
(a) Undergraduate schemes: An External
Examiner should be responsible for 30-100 candidates across all the schemes to
which he or she is appointed, unless the permission of the relevant Dean has
been obtained for an alternative arrangement.
(b) Taught postgraduate schemes: An External
Examiner should normally be responsible for 15-50 candidates unless the
permission of the Dean of the Graduate School has been obtained for an
alternative arrangement.
Nomination of External
Examiners
5.1 In the Summer
Vacation, the Examinations Officer will write to Heads of Department informing
them of the need to nominate External Examiners for schemes of study where the
External Examiner will have served for three or four years in the following
December. Each department will be given a list of those External Examiners who
are eligible for re-appointment for a further (fourth) year and asked to check
and annotate the lists and to recommend re-appointments as appropriate. A
nomination form in respect of new appointments, including a brief curriculum
vitae. All information must be with the Examinations Office by the end of
the first week of the Autumn Term.
5.2 Nominations are
considered and approved by Deans on behalf of Council. (In respect of schemes
delivered entirely at collaborative partner institutions, the relevant Dean is
the Dean of Collaborative Education, and for schemes where delivery is shared
between a collaborative partner and the University, the Dean of the Graduate
School or appropriate undergraduate School.)
5.3 Departments must
appoint at least one External Examiner to each scheme. External Examiners may
also be appointed to courses.
(d)
Academic Offences –
New Procedures (S.M.150/01)
The Senate approved new Academic Offences Procedures as
set out in Appendix B attached. The
sections on Cheating have been removed from the Progress Procedures. Guidance on the operation of the new
procedures will be provided at the beginning of the academic
year.
(e)
Confidentiality of
SAC/T Results (S.MM.131-139/01)
The Senate resolved:
131/01
‘(i) that, subject to
consultation with and the agreement of the Essex branch of the AUT, detailed SAT
results should be made available to individual teachers and their Heads of
Department or equivalent;
132/01
(ii) that
anonymised SAT results, together with all SAC results, should be made available
to QAA Subject Reviewers and members of professional accreditation bodies
reviewing University provision;
133/01
(iii) that anonymised
summary data on SAT should continue to be received by Academic Standards
Committee on an annual basis;
134/01
(iv) that the primary
responsibility for reviewing SAC results, for determining the form in which they
would be reported and the committees, groups or individuals which would receive
them should rest with the Head of Department or equivalent;
135/01
(v) that feedback on
SAC to staff and students should be as comprehensive as possible and should only
exclude information which was frivolous or otherwise irrelevant to the course,
or information which related exclusively to the competence of an individual
member of teaching staff;
136/01
(vi) that students
should receive feedback on SAC in the following ways:
(a) where clear
problems with a course had been identified, feedback as soon as possible on how
these were being addressed;
(b) routine
annual reporting on the outcomes of the SAC process both to students in the
department generally (by email and/or by posting on the departmental website)
and - in the Autumn term immediately following the year in question - to the
relevant Staff-Student Liaison Committee.
137/01
(vii) that departmental
teaching staff should receive feedback on SAC through detailed reports on their
own courses;
138/01
(viii) that the appropriate
departmental officers and/or committee(s) concerned with the department (such as
full Departmental Meetings, curriculum committees or degree review committees),
should receive annual reports on all courses assessed;
139/01
(ix) that Academic
Standards Committee should receive an annual report from each department or
teaching unit, during the autumn term immediately following the year in
question, on the form of assessment used for SAC, the significant outcomes, and
any action taken or to be taken as a result.’
(f)
Code of Practice on
Teaching by GTAs – Job Specification (S.M.167/01)
The Senate approved a person/job specification framework
for inclusion in the Code of Practice on Teaching by Graduate Students, as set
out in Appendix C attached.
SECTION B – FOR INFORMATION
Academic Policy Committee
approved a revised new degree scheme proposal form, which will come into effect
from 1 December 2001. New degree
scheme proposals, for consideration by School Boards from Spring 2002, will be
required in the new format. Further
minor modifications are required before the form is
published.
(b)
SAT and SAC -
Future Developments (S.MM.140-142/01)
The Senate
resolved:
140/01
(i) that the
SAT process should be suspended for the academic year 2001/02;
141/01
(ii) that the
resources normally devoted to SAT should instead be devoted to supporting
departments in the further development of systems for handling SAC;
142/01
(iii) that consultation
take place with departments and Schools during 2001/02, with a view to replacing
the central SAT system by a devolved system in which the quality of teaching
would be assessed in association with courses as part of an enhanced SAC
process.
(c)
Revised Progress
Procedures (S.M.167/01)
The Senate approved revised
Progress Procedures for 2001/01 as set out in Appendix D
attached.
(d)
Revised Guidelines
for the Use of IT Facilities (S.M.118-119/01)
The Senate approved revised
Guidelines for the Use of IT Facilities with immediate effect. These have been published at http://www2.essex.ac.uk/cs/about/regulations/proper_use.html
and will be included in the relevant student publications for 2001/02. The following new regulation was
approved for inclusion in the University Calendar from
2001/02:
‘All users of IT facilities at
the University must comply with the Guidelines for the Use of IT
Facilities.’
(e)
New Regulation –
Communication with Students (S.M.123/01)
The Senate resolved that the
following new regulation be included in the 2001/02
Calendar:
‘Students are required to acquaint themselves with
formal communications from academic departments and administrative sections of
the University. These may take the form of written correspondence, sent by
internal or external mail, notices posted on official noticeboards, and messages
sent by electronic mail. Students are expected to access their University e-mail
at least once per week during term-time.’
Departments have been asked to
inform students of the requirement to access their University e-mail accounts at
least once per week in term-time via departmental student
handbooks.
(f)
Proposals for New
PGT Collaborative Programmes (S.MM.152-154/01)
|
152/01 |
RESOLVED: (a) that proposals
for new taught Master's degrees, Diplomas or Certificates at postgraduate level
taught wholly at a partner institution within the purview of the Board of
Studies for Collaborative Education be considered by the Board for
approval;
|
153/01 |
(b) that proposals
for new taught Masters degrees, Diplomas or Certificates at postgraduate level
involving delivery of a programme of study partly by the University itself and
partly by a partner institution within the
purview of the Board of Studies for Collaborative Education be considered by the
Board for approval, but first be submitted
to the Dean of the Graduate School for comment.
|
154/01 |
(c) that proposals
for new Masters degrees by research, MPhil, PhD and Professional Doctorates be
considered for approval by the Board of the Graduate School.
(g)
Abolition of
Academic Policy Committee (S.MM.178-180/01)
The Senate resolved that
Academic Policy Committee should be abolished with effect from October 2001 and
that the terms of reference of the committees which currently report to APC
should be amended as appropriate to reflect new reporting arrangements (see
Appendix E attached). It was noted
that matters of general academic policy would be discussed in a variety of
forums as appropriate to the issue.
These would include School Boards, the twice-termly meeting of the
Vice-Chancellor’s Advisory Group and Deans, and the weekly meeting of Heads of
Department.
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 FOR STUDENT REPRESENTATION WITHIN
DEPARTMENTS
Each Department or Centre
responsible for a degree scheme is required to establish at least one Staff
Student Liaison Committee (SSLCs). This Code of Practice identifies the
objectives of operating SSLCs and the minimum requirements that all Departments
and Centres are required to observe. Any Department or Centre wishing to depart
from this Code may do so with the permission of Academic Standards
Committee.
The detailed constitutional and
operational arrangements for SSLCs shall be determined by each Department or
Centre, according to local need. The Department may for example wish to adopt
parallel SSLCs tailored to particular student groups, such as undergraduates or
postgraduates or scheme groups, but must observe the following principles and
minimum requirements.
1. The
objectives of establishing and operating SSLCs are:
(a)
to provide a mechanism for the students within a Department or Centre
responsible for a degree scheme to have their views on academic matters formally
represented to the academic staff of a Department;
(b)
to provide a mechanism for the Department to consult students;
(c)
to provide a mechanism for ensuring that students from different groups
within a Department can have their views represented;
(d)
to provide a constituency for the election of departmental
representatives on the Students’ Union Council.
2. The
minimum requirements that each Department and Centre is required to observe
are:
(a)
At least half the members of each SSLC shall be
students.
(b)
Student members will normally be elected by secret ballot from among
students in the appropriate years and degree schemes for each SSLC. The
elections shall be organized by the Head of Department or her/his
representative, in cooperation with the Students’ Union Assistant Returning
Officer for the Department, provided that this person has been identified by the
end of the first week of the Autumn term.
(c)
The members of the SSLC(s) (both undergraduate and postgraduate) for each
Department shall elect the Department’s representative on the Students’ Union
Council. The Department shall ensure that the first meeting, which will be the meeting at which the
Students’ Union Council representative is elected, is held as early as possible
in the Autumn term, and shall make appropriate arrangements for a joint election
where there is more than one SSLC in the Department.
(d)
The Head of Department or her/his representative chairing the SSLC shall
be responsible for organizing its meetings in a timely manner, and shall also be
available for consultation with members of the SSLC on an individual
basis.
(e)
Each SSLC shall meet at least once in the Autumn term and at least once
in the Spring term. Additional meetings may be held if at least half of the
student representatives or half the academic staff request a meeting or if at
least 25 students of the Department or Centre request a meeting, in writing.
(f)
Notice of Staff-Student Liaison Committee meetings and relevant papers
will be circulated to members by the Department at least one week in
advance.
(g)
Each Department and Centre shall publicise the constitutional and
operational arrangements for its SSLC(s) in the relevant student handbook.
(h)
Each SSLC shall review the relevant handbook annually.
(i)
Each SSLC shall receive a report of any action taken in response to the
Student Assessment of Courses activity.
(j)
The minutes of each SSLC meeting shall be received by the relevant
Department Meeting, the Dean of School and the Advice and Representation
Coordinator of the Students’ Union.
Summer term 2001
Appendix B
University
of Essex
Academic
Offences Procedures
Academic
Offences Procedures
A.
Heads of Department*
*throughout
the document Head of Department shall also be taken to mean Area Director or
Centre Director
A.1
Each
Head of Department shall be responsible under the procedures described in
section A, for the students taking a course in his/her own Department. Where a student is charged with
committing an offence on a school-based course such as CS101 Enlightenment the
Head responsible for the student’s degree scheme shall instigate the
investigation.
A.2
When,
in the opinion of a Head of Department, an academic offence may have occurred
justifying action against a student taking a course in his/her Department,
he/she shall instigate an investigation of such a breach.
A.3
On
instigating an investigation against a student, the Head of Department shall
notify the Dean of the Student’s School of study and shall ask the School’s
Office if there has been a previous offence.
A.4
The
Head of Department may deal with cases where the student has admitted guilt, has
not previously been found guilty of an academic offence under these procedures,
where the case does not also include alleged breaches of the University
Disciplinary Regulations, and where the student does not exercise his/her right
to have the case dealt with by the Dean or an Academic Offences Committee.
A.5
In
such cases the Head of Department shall have the authority, on behalf of Senate,
to take the following action:
i)
issue a formal warning to the student.
ii) Order
that the student’s marks be altered in accordance with the gravity of the
offence and all circumstances of the case, including any evidence of the
intention to deceive. A Head shall
have the authority to reduce a mark by a specified amount or award a mark of
zero for any work, or test, on the affected course where coursework comprises no
more than 50% of the course or module in which the offence occurred. (If the coursework comprises more than
50% of the course then the Head must refer the case to the Dean).
A.6
When
a student denies guilt, admits guilt but requests not to be dealt with by their
Head of Department, or where the Head of Department cannot (under A.4), or
decides not, to deal with the case, a Head of Department may institute action
against a student by referring the case to the Dean of the student’s School of
study.
A.7
The
Head of Department shall have the following duties:
a) To
inform each student whose case has been referred to him/her, the substance of
such reference and of the student’s right to appeal under these
procedures.
b) To
inform in writing each student whose case has be dealt with by him/her, his/her
resolutions and of the student’s right to appeal under these
procedures.
c) To
inform the Dean, in writing, his/her resolutions in respect of any case dealt
with under these procedures.
A.8
In
the absence or indisposition of the Head of Department the case shall be
referred to the Dean of School who will determine what action shall be
taken. No person shall perform the
functions of a Head of Department regarding academic offences as set out in this
section unless appointed by the Dean according to the provisions of this
paragraph.
A.9
The
number of cases dealt with by a Head of Department under these procedures shall
be reported by the Dean to Senate on an annual basis.
B.
Deans of Schools
B.1
In
cases of alleged academic offices that also involve alleged breaches of
University Disciplinary Regulations, the Dean shall not invoke the Academic
Offences procedures, or if the Academic Offences procedures have already been
invoked, will suspend those procedures and refer the matter to the Proctor. At
the conclusion of a disciplinary investigation, the Dean will decide whether of
not to invoke, or re-invoke, the Academic Offences
procedures.
B.2
On
referral of an allegation after the degree has been conferred, the Dean shall
consult the Vice-Chancellor who shall determine the procedures to be used in
dealing with the case.
B.3
The
Dean has the authority to deal with cases reported by a Head of Department in
respect of a student who does not wish to exercise their right to have the case
dealt with by an Academic Offences Committee, or where a student requests to
have the case dealt with by the Dean rather than the Head of Department. In such
cases the Dean shall have the authority, on behalf of Senate, to find an
allegation proven and to resolve, on behalf of Senate, that penalties be imposed
on the student. The Dean may
take the following action:
i)
issue a formal warning to the student.
ii) Order
that the student’s marks be altered in accordance with the gravity of the
offence and all circumstances of the case, including any evidence of the
intention to deceive. The Dean may
award a mark of zero for any piece or pieces of work, course, test, examination
script or individual answer on an examination script. If this is felt inappropriate the Dean
may direct that the mark for any piece or pieces of work, course, test,
examination script or individual answer on an examination script be reduced by a
specified amount.
iii) Where there
are sufficient mitigating circumstances, to impose no penalty, but to take some
other course of action as seems appropriate in the circumstances (for example to
require the student to submit replacement work). However the Dean does not have the
authority to require a student to temporarily withdraw from the University or to
repeat a year of study.
B.4
In
aggravated cases (for example repeated offences or where an offence involves a
postgraduate dissertation/thesis which is a significant component of assessment
for the degree), or a case of a serious nature, the Dean will normally refer the
matter to the Academic Offences Committee.
Cheating in examinations which could towards a final degree result shall
be treated as serious cases.
However the Dean does have discretion to deal with allegations of
cheating in a first year examination, making a preliminary assessment of the
case and inviting the student to discuss the allegations. The Dean may then refer the case to
Academic Offences Committee is s/he believes it is
serious.
B.5
The
Dean shall have the authority, subject to the procedures set out in Section D
below, to appoint an Academic Offences Committee, according to the provisions of
section C, and to refer to such a committee cases where penalties set out in
Section C.3(e)(iii)-(vii) appear to be warranted.
B.6
A
Dean cannot chair an Academic Offences Committee or an Academic Offences Appeal
Committee if s/he has previously been involved in making a judgement about a
case.
B.7
On
the request of the PVC (Academic Standards), the Dean shall have the authority,
subject to the procedures set out in Section F below, to appoint an Academic
Offences Committee of Appeal, according to the provisions of section E. An
Academic Offences Committee of Appeal shall be a committee of
Senate.
B.8
The
Dean shall have the following duties:
a) To
inform in writing each student whose case has been referred to him/her the
substance of such reference and of the student’s right to appeal under these
procedures.
b) To
inform in writing each student whose case has been dealt with by him/her,
his/her resolutions and of the student’s right to appeal under these
procedures.
c) To
inform in writing each student whose case has been referred to an Academic
Offences Committee, of the substance of such reference and of the student’s
right to appeal under these procedures.
d) To
inform in writing each student whose case has been heard by an Academic Offences
Committee, the resolutions of that Committee.
e) To
inform in writing each student who lodges a request for an appeal, and normally
within ten working days of the receipt by him her of that written request,
whether or not, in his/her judgement, the request discloses a proper ground for
an appeal.
f)
To
inform each student whose case has been referred to an Academic Offences
Committee of Appeal, the resolutions of that Committee.
B.9
The Dean shall have the following powers to be exercised at his/her sole discretion:
B.10
The
number of cases dealt with by a Dean under these procedures shall be reported by
the Dean to Senate on an annual basis.
C.
An Academic Offences Committee
C.1
An
Academic Offences Committee shall be a Committee of Senate. Members of the Committee shall be drawn
from a University panel to which Schools will nominate
representatives.
C.2
For
each case designated by a Dean, an Academic Offences Committee shall consist of
a Dean (in the chair), and two members of staff from outside the student’s
department, normally drawn from the University panel, who have no connection
with the case in question. A
member of the Students’ Union Executive or Students’ Union permanent staff may
attend the meeting to observe the proceedings but cannot be a member of the
Committee or take part in the decision-making. The Committee shall be serviced by a
Secretary.
C.3
An
Academic Offences Committee shall:
a) Receive
a report from the Head of Department (or his/her nominee) on the
case.
b) Consider
the case, and exercise its powers according to these procedures and the
provisions set out in section D below.
c) Report
its resolutions at a meeting to which the student concerned has been
invited.
d) Resolve,
by majority vote, on the balance of the evidence presented at the hearing of the
case that the student concerned be found either innocent or guilty of the
academic offence with which they have been charged.
e) Resolve,
in the case of a student who has been found guilty of an academic offence, that
either no penalty be imposed, or that one or more of the following penalties be
imposed:
i.
Issue
a formal warning to the student.
ii.
Order
that the student’s marks be altered in accordance with the gravity of the
offence and all circumstances of the case, including any evidence of the
intention to deceive. The Committee
shall have the authority to award a mark of zero for any piece or pieces of
work, course, test, examination script or individual answer on an examination
script. If this is felt
inappropriate the Committee may direct that the mark for any piece or pieces of
work, course, test, examination script or individual answer on an examination
script be reduced by a specified amount.
iii.
Take
some other course of action where there are sufficient mitigating circumstances
(for example, to require the student to submit replacement work, or to require
the student to withdraw temporarily from the University, or to repeat a year of
study).
iv.
Recommend
to the Board of Examiners that the class of degree awarded be
restricted.
v.
Recommend
to the Board of Examiners that a candidate for a taught Master’s degree be
awarded a Diploma where cheating has been proven in the Dissertation but where
the performance in assessed components has been satisfactory and sufficient to
justify the award of Diploma under the Rules of Assessment for the scheme of
study.
vi.
In
aggravated cases (for example, repeated offences) to require the student to
withdraw from the University, or to determine that no degree be
awarded.
vii.
In
the case of a PhD, MPhil or Master’s by Dissertation candidate, determine that
no degree be awarded.
C.4
If
the Academic Offences Committee has taken action under paragraphs C.3 e(ii),
(iv), (v), (vi) or (vii) above and the Board of Examiners has already met to
determine the degree classification, the Board shall be reconvened to reconsider
its decision in the light of the action taken by the
Committee.
C.5
The
number of cases dealt with by an Academic Offences Committee under these
procedures shall be reported by the Dean to Senate on an annual
basis.
D.
Academic Offences Committee Procedures
In
this section, the terms “Head of Department” and “Dean” refer to the Head of the
Department in which the offence
occurred and the Dean of the School in which the student is registered for a
degree.
D.1
The
Head of the Department (or a person designated by him/her) shall present the
case against the student charged.
D.2
The
student referred to a Committee shall be notified in writing by the Secretary to
the Committee of the time and place at which the case will be heard, and shall
be informed that he/she may bring a student or other member of the University or
Students’ Union to help him/her in presenting his/her case to the
Committee.
D.3
The
student charged may notify the Dean in writing, within five days of the date of
the dispatch of the notification from the Dean of the charge or charges against
him/her, and/or before the meeting of the Committee, that he/she admits to the
charge or charges. In this case the student need not attend the Committee, and
the Committee shall be free to proceed in his/her absence. In such a case, the
student may submit a statement in mitigation of penalty.
D.4
The
Chair of the Committee shall have the authority to determine the order of
proceedings and to exclude any material which appears irrelevant or
repetitive.
D.5
The
student charged will be invited to be present with a representative whenever
oral evidence is being heard by the Committee. Non-attendance of the student
charged, or his/her representative shall not bar the Committee from proceeding.
The Committee may at its discretion adjourn in order to enable the student
charged, or his/her representative, to be present.
D.6
The
Committee may adjourn where it is of the opinion that its proceedings are being
impeded by circumstances beyond its control. The Committee shall meet to
consider an adjourned case, as soon as it is feasible and not later than three
months after the adjournment, although the case need not be determined at the
resumed meeting. Where it is not reasonably practicable for the same members to
attend the Committee reconvened to hear an adjourned case, the Dean may co-opt
up to three additional members to replace those unable to attend and, if
necessary, may appoint from among those co-opted members a new Chair. Where two
or more additional members are so co-opted, the reconvened hearing shall proceed
as a new hearing. Where only one additional member is so co-opted and the
student charged so requests, the reconvened hearing shall take the form of a new
hearing.
D.7
Only
members of the Committee, the Observer from the Students’ Union and the
Secretary shall be present while a Committee is reaching a decision on innocence
or guilt, or on any penalty or other action.
D.8
If
the Committee finds the student guilty of an academic offence, it shall, before
deciding on the penalty, be informed by the Secretary of any previous academic
offences committed by the student.
E.
An Academic Offences Committee of Appeal
E.1
On
the request of a student who properly lodges an appeal against a resolution of a
Head of Department, a Dean or an Academic Offences Committee, the PVC (Academic
Standards) shall nominate a Dean, other than the Dean of the student’s School,
to deal with the request under the provision of section E and according to the
procedures set out in the section F.
E.2
The Dean appointed to consider
whether there are grounds for appeal shall inform in writing each student who
lodges a request for an appeal, and normally within ten working days of the
receipt by him her of that written request, whether or not, in his/her
judgement, the request discloses a proper ground for an
appeal.
E.3
A student shall have the right of appeal to an Academic Offences Committee of Appeal against any resolution of a Head of Department, Dean or Academic Offences Committee on the following grounds:
(a) that there is material evidence now available which was
not previously reasonably available to the Head, Dean or Academic Offences
Committee and of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to whether the
result might have been different had the material been available; or
(b)
that the Head, Dean or
Academic Offences Committee departed from the provisions of sections A, B or C
(respectively), in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the appellant and
causing reasonable doubt as to whether the result might have been different had
this not occurred; or
(c)
that the facts set out in
the findings of the Head, Dean or Academic Offences Committee do not warrant the
resolution that there was an Academic Offence as charged.
(d)
that the penalty imposed
by the Head of Department, Dean or Academic Offences Committee was unreasonable
having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
An appeal must be lodged with the PVC (Academic Standards) within five working days of the date on which notification of the resolution was despatched to the student concerned by the Head of Department or the Dean. Should the student be able to show to the satisfaction of the PVC (Academic Standards) that circumstances beyond his/her control prevented this time limit being adhered to and that injustice would result from adhering to it, the PVC (Academic Standards) may, in his/her absolute discretion, extend the time within which an appeal may be lodged up to a period of thirty working days from the date on which notification of the resolution was despatched to the student concerned by the Head of Department or the Dean. The written notice of appeal lodged by the appellant with the PVC (Academic Standards) shall set out concisely the grounds of appeal, and where relevant, the circumstances upon which it is claimed an extension of the time limit for the lodging of the appeal should be granted.
E.4
An
Academic Offences Committee of Appeal shall be a committee of Senate. Members of the Committee shall be drawn
from the University panel for Academic Offences to which Schools will nominate
representatives.
E.5
For
each case designated by a Dean, an Academic Offences Committee of Appeal shall
consist of a Dean (in the chair), and two members of staff from outside the
student’s department, normally drawn from the University panel, who have had no
connection with the case in question.
No member of a previous Academic Offences Committee may serve on an
Academic Offences Committee of Appeal for the same case. A member of the
Students’ Union Executive or Students’ Union permanent staff may attend the
meeting to observe the proceedings but cannot be a member of the Committee or
take part in the decision-making.
The Committee shall be serviced by a Secretary.
E.6
An Academic Offences Committee of
Appeal shall:
(a) Receive
a report from the relevant Academic Offence Committee on the
case.
(b) Consider
the Appeal, and exercise its powers according to these procedures and the
provisions set out in the document entitled “Academic Offences Committee of
Appeal Guidelines”.
(c) Report
its resolutions at a meeting to which the student concerned has been invited,
and report them to the Dean of the Student’s School of
Study.
E.7
An
Academic Offences Committee of Appeal shall have the authority
to:
a.
Rescind
a resolution of a Head, Dean or Academic Offences Committee that the student is
guilty, and to rescind all consequential penalties.
b. Confirm
a resolution of a Head, Dean or Academic Offences Committee that the student is
guilty.
c. Confirm,
or amend (increase or decrease), penalties of a Head, Dean or an Academic
Offences Committee, provided that any amendments are consistent with the powers
of the original authority.
E.8
The
number of cases dealt with by an Academic Offences Appeals Committee under these
procedures shall be reported by the PVC (Academic Standards) to Senate on an
annual basis.
F.
Academic Offences Committee of Appeal
In
this section the term “Appointed Dean” refers to the Dean appointed by the PVC
(Academic) to deal with the application for appeal; the term “Head of
Department” refers to the Head of the Department in which the offence
occurred.
F.1
The
following provisions relate to an appeal against a decision of an Academic
Offences Committee, a Dean or a Head of Department.
F.2
On
receipt of a request for appeal which discloses proper grounds for appeal, the
Appointed Dean shall request from the Dean or Head of Department against whose
decision an appeal is made, a Statement of the Case, which shall include details
of the charge or charges in respect of which the decision was made, a brief
summary of the evidence and of the relevant findings, the decision, details of
any penalty imposed, a brief comment as to the reason for such findings,
decision and penalty and any further information which the person or body
concerned considered to be relevant.
F.3
The
Head of Department (or his/her nominee) shall present the case against the
Appeal.
F.4
The
Appointed Dean shall notify the Head of Department and the student of the time
and place at which the appeal will be heard. The Head of Department and student
shall be provided with a copy of the Statement of the Case in advance of the
meeting of the Academic Offences Committee of Appeal. The student shall also be
informed by the Appointed Dean of his/her right to bring a student or employee
of the University or Students' Union to help in presenting the appeal to the
Committee.
F.5
The
student may withdraw the appeal as of right. A student who fails to withdraw the
appeal must proceed with it unless the Academic Offences Committee of Appeal
gives leave for its withdrawal.
F.6
The
method of procedure in paragraphs 4-8 of the Academic Offences Committee
Procedures shall apply to meetings of an Academic Offences Committee of
Appeal.
|
DW
C:\My Documents\progress\Academic Offences Procedures – july
2001.doc |
Published
by Schools’ Offices
July
2001
Appendix C
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.
University of
Essex
FURTHER
PARTICULARS
Department of *
GRADUATE TEACHING ASSISTANTS
Department/Section:
(name)
Responsible to:
Head of Department of *
Reports on a day to day basis
to: (either HOD or other
nominated person, as decided by Department)
Purpose of job:
The
persons appointed will be required to teach undergraduate students, to undertake
marking of coursework assignments, and related administrative
work.
Duties of the post will
include:
·
Preparing and teaching classes
to undergraduate students
·
Holding office hours related to
the courses taught
·
Marking coursework
assignments
·
Maintaining contact with the
course supervisor
·
Undertaking related
administrative duties
·
Attending training courses and
workshops
·
Attending briefing meetings as
part of the induction process
·
any other duties as may
from time to time be assigned by the Head of Department or her/his
nominee
These
duties are a guide to the work that the postholder will initially be required to
undertake. They may be changed from
time to time to meet changing circumstances and do not form part of the contract
of employment.
Essential experience, skills and
attributes of the postholder
·
A
degree or other appropriate qualification in a relevant subject area (this may
be more specific, depending on the requirements of each specific
department)
·
A
willingness to undertake a programme of training relevant to the requirements of
this post
·
Ability to communicate clearly
and effectively with a wide range of students
·
(Where the teaching duties are
linked to a bursary, evidence of excellent research potential is
required)
Desirable experience, skills and
attributes of the postholder
·
Good knowledge of the
requirements of the subject area of the course taught (in some disciplines this
may be an essential requirement)
·
Previous experience of teaching
or evidence of other activity requiring similar skills
·
Evidence of the ability to show
flexibility and adaptability in teaching style
Appointment to these posts will
be for a specified period of weeks during the academic year. Payment will vary
according to the number and mix of classes taught, but will be based on
multiples of the University base rate for Graduate Teaching Assistants,
currently £10.65 per contact hour. (Actual rates to be
specified for each post by the Department)
(If a Department has a specific
policy relating to sharing GTA work between students to ensure that all students
have the opportunity to undertake teaching at some point during their
postgraduate study it should be set out clearly here.)
Shortlisted candidates will be
interviewed by the Head of Department or his/her nominee and one other member of
teaching staff. Where teaching
duties are linked to a bursary, selection will be made on the basis of both
research and teaching potential.
Candidates invited to interview will be provided with feedback on their
interview performance and suitability for the role of Graduate Teaching
Assistant on request.
Applications should be made
to:
(Department contact
point)
to arrive not later than *
Interviews are to be held on
*.
Appendix
D
Progress and Appeals Procedures for Taught Course
Schemes
Effective
from 2001/2002 Academic Year
Updated
June 2001
List of
Contents Page
Who do these Procedures apply to
1 Monitoring
of Student Attendance and Progress
2 Coursework
Deadlines
3 University
regulations governing student progress and attendance
4 Referral to
Progress Committee
5 Composition
and Form of Progress Committees
6 Conduct of
Progress Committees
7 The Powers
of Progress Committees
8 Progress
Procedures after Undergraduate Examinations for Foundation, First or Second year
Students
9 Progress
Procedures for students on degree schemes with a year
abroad
10 Definition of
Extenuating Circumstances
11 Appeals against the
decision of a Progress Committee
12 Appeals against the
progress decision of a Foundation, First or Second Year Board of
Examiners
13 Procedures for appeal
against Second or Final year or Taught Course Masters degree
results
Progress Committees - Order of Proceedings Appendix
A
These
procedures apply to all students on taught schemes of study, including the
following: students on undergraduate schemes; students on University of Essex
foundation-year schemes taught on campus or away; students on postgraduate
taught schemes; students studying abroad as
part of their degree scheme.
(a) Coursework
submission is the primary means by which student attendance and progress is
monitored in and by departments.
(b) Heads
of Department/Area or Centre Directors are responsible for ensuring that an
effective means of monitoring students' progress and attendance is established
and maintained in each department in accordance with the requirements set out
below.
(c) Heads
of Department/Area or Centre Directors are responsible for any additional
progress monitoring procedures the Department may decide to operate.
(d)
Departmental procedures
should be communicated to all students taking courses in the
Department.
(e)
First Year
Undergraduate Students
i) Weeks 4-6 Departments will input
attendance of First Year students at supporting tuition, i.e. classes, tutorials
and laboratories, on the COR system so that the attendance of First Year
undergraduate students can be monitored by the Undergraduate Schools Office
via the central COR system in Week 7, using attendance data input by
departments, and again during the Spring term using coursework submission
records in the COR system.
ii) If the Undergraduate Schools Office
identifies a First Year student’s attendance or progress as unsatisfactory the
relevant School Administrator will normally either ask the course director to
write to the student, where the problem appears to be limited to one course, or
will write a warning letter from the Dean directly to the student if he/she is
not attending several courses.
(f) Second and Final Year Undergraduate
Students
i) Weeks 5-6 Departments must be able
to confirm students are enrolled for the correct number of courses, that these
are appropriate to the students’ scheme of study and that they are attending
these courses.
ii)
Weeks 12-13 Departments must be able to confirm students have submitted
the required pieces of work and are performing satisfactorily and may use the
COR system for recording attendance, in order that the data is available in a
consistent and accessible format, particularly if a student is referred to the
Dean.
iii) Heads
of Departments/Area or Centre Directors are responsible for taking action where
Second and Final Year students’ progress and/or attendance are unsatisfactory
and may delegate this task to one or more members of departmental academic
staff. e.g. Undergraduate Director.
iv) When a
Second or Final Year student is referred to the Dean s/he will write to the
student to inform him/her of the gravity of the situation and will indicate that
the student may, if progress does not improve, fail the year of study. Students will normally be offered the
opportunity to discuss their situation in person with the Dean if they so
wish.
(g) Postgraduate Taught Masters
Students
i) Departments must publish annually
procedures for monitoring the progress of students on taught postgraduate
Masters schemes.
ii)
Graduate Students who have reached the end of the maximum period of study
will normally be deemed to have failed to have completed the scheme and will not
be referred to a Progress Committee.
(h) Departments operating joint degree schemes
should liaise with the other departments involved to ensure that there is full
co-ordination on the monitoring of progress. In the case of multidisciplinary
schemes the Director of the degree scheme should liaise with contributing
departments.
(i) Where a department’s efforts to encourage
a student to improve have been unsuccessful and where progress measured
by coursework submission is such that the student is unlikely to complete the
year successfully, the Head of Department/Area or Centre Director should refer
the student to the Dean.
(j) There is no intention to discourage
teachers from contacting students direct if they are concerned about them, but
they should make sure that they follow the procedures agreed within each
department if they do so. Teachers
should contact the Student Support Office for advice where there is a major
welfare issue, probably in consultation with a Senior Adviser in the case of
undergraduates.
In exceptional
circumstances the Dean may refer a student to the Progress Committee but in the
majority of cases Examination Boards will consider students whose progress
continues to be unsatisfactory, after the examination results are
known.
2.
Coursework Deadlines
a)
Coursework
deadlines are set by Departments, not Schools of Study. Extensions beyond departmental deadlines
are granted by the Head of Department or his/her nominee.
b)
The
absolute, University-wide deadline for the submission of any coursework by
students who have been given an extension beyond the normal departmental
deadline (or scheduling of any make-up tests) is 4 p.m. on the last working day
before examinations begin.
3.
University Regulations Governing Student Progress and Attendance
(Proposed amendments in italics)
Regulation
7.1
Students
are required to be regular and punctual in their attendance at such instruction
as may be prescribed by the Board of their School.
Regulation
7.3
Students
are required to see members of academic staff to discuss their attendance,
conduct and progress when requested to do so.
Regulation 7.5
If
a student is absent from prescribed instruction for more than six weeks during
any one term, that term may not, except with the permission of the
Vice-Chancellor, be included as part of the scheme of study which he/she is
required to complete.
Regulation 7.6
A student who is absent from teaching for more than one
week during term shall inform the Head of department as soon as possible, in
writing, giving the reason for his or her absence. A student who is absent for more than
two consecutive weeks during term time must provide medical evidence in the case
of illness, or appropriate corroboration where there are other reasons for
absence, which must be sent to the Student Support Office at the earliest
opportunity.
Candidates following a final year scheme of study will
be permitted to withdraw temporarily from the University only if permission has
been given either by the Board of the School concerned or by the Dean acting on
its behalf before the Monday of the sixth week of the Spring term in the year in
question or, thereafter, by the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Academic Standards),
to whom the Dean shall refer such cases.
Insert The final deadline for permission to withdraw
temporarily in the First and Second years
is 4 p.m. on Friday of Week 22 (or the working day two weeks immediately
prior to the first day of the examination period. If permission is given, such
candidates shall be required to register partially and to pay an appropriate fee
as determined from time to time by the University. If permission is not given, candidates
must submit themselves, or will be deemed to have submitted themselves, for
assessment in the Summer Term (Delete ‘of the final year scheme of
study’) in the normal way (see also Regulation 6.17 relating to the award of
aegrotat degrees).
(Delete ‘This Regulation does not affect the power of the
Progress Committee of the Board of the School to determine at any time under the
provisions of regulation 6.10 that an unsatisfactory student be required to
withdraw from the University.’)
Regulation 6.10
The progress of each student shall be reviewed after
each examination session and at regular intervals during the academic year, by
the Dean acting on behalf of the Board of the School concerned. The Board of each School shall annually
appoint a Progress Committee to consider cases referred to it by the Dean. The Progress Committee shall act on
behalf of the Board of the School concerned and may require a student whose
progress is unsatisfactory to withdraw from the University. First (Delete ‘Year and Level
1 Examinations Committees and, for specified degree schemes’,) and Second
Year Boards of Examiners may also require a student whose progress is
unsatisfactory to withdraw from the University. A student who is required to withdraw
from the University on the grounds of unsatisfactory progress has the right of
appeal in accordance with the procedures approved by
Senate.
Regulation 6.11
Heads of Departments or, in
the case of students following joint schemes of study, the Director of the
scheme, shall inform the Dean of the School concerned of any student whose
performance suggests that prima
facie the student will be unable to meet the requirements for obtaining a
pass at the end of the year. The
cases of such students will (Delete ‘normally be referred to the Progress
Committee of the Board of the School.
It shall be open to the Progress Committee to refuse to allow entry to an
examination to ahy student who it is satisfied is unable to meet the
requirements for obtaining the degree for which he or she is registered’)
Insert ‘ be dealt with by the Dean of the School who will normally write
to the students to warn them of the gravity of their situation and the
likelihood that they will fail the year or the degree for which they are
registered.
4.
Referral To Progress Committee
a)
If the Dean of a School
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.
b)
The student should be
given adequate time to seek advice and prepare his or her case before the
meeting of the Progress Committee.
The letter to the student will indicate the reason for the referral to
the Progress Committee.
c)
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.
d)
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.
e)
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.
f)
The
student will be invited to submit in advance the following
documents:
(i)
a
written statement giving any facts or extenuating circumstances (see section 10
of this document) which the student thinks may have affected his or her
performance;
(ii)
documentary evidence to
support any extenuating circumstances put forward, without which the information
may be disregarded by the Progress Committee.
5.
Composition and Form of Progress Committees
a)
Each School of Study will
have a Progress Committee convened and chaired by the Dean of the School. The quorum for a Progress Committee is
four.
b)
A
Progress Committee, for each student considered by that Committee, will normally
consist of the Dean of the School and two others, neither of whom should be from
the student's department, selected by the Dean from a panel approved annually by
the Board of the School, together with
(i)
for undergraduates, a
suitably qualified member of staff from the student's department or Area (or
departments in the case of joint schemes),
or
(ii)
for graduates, the
Director of Graduate Studies or his/her nominee.
6.
Conduct of Progress Committees
a)
The
Progress Committee will consider each case referred by the Dean of the
School.
b)
The
Committee should receive papers fully setting out the case. The Head of Department (or Scheme
Directors for Joint or multidisciplinary degrees) should be responsible for
gathering the required information.
In the case of a first-year student, the Undergraduate Schools Office
will be responsible for preparing the papers.
c)
The Progress Committee may
take into account performance in any remedial work and tests prescribed for
overseas students following a test of proficiency in written and spoken English
taken on arrival at the University; the Progress Committee may also take into
account failure to attend the course or take the test.
d)
The
student should receive copies of all the papers that are presented to Progress
Committee, unless the confidentiality of a document precludes showing it to the
student, in which case the Dean may inform the Committee and the student of the
existence and general import of the document without divulging the details. The papers will be available to the
student when they are available to members of the Progress Committee, normally
in advance of the meeting.
e)
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.
f)
Meetings of Progress
Committees will be conducted in accordance with the checklist attached as
Appendix A to these Procedures.
g)
The
decision of the Progress Committee 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.
7.
Powers of Progress Committee
(a) After
consideration of the case, the Progress Committee will make one of the following
decisions:
(i)
that the student be
permitted to proceed, with or without specific conditions;
(ii)
that the student be
required to withdraw permanently.
(b)
In certain circumstances the Progress Committee may deem it appropriate
to:
(iii)
permit the student to
repeat an appropriate period of study, including all or part of a period of
study abroad.
(iv)
permit the student to
transfer to another appropriate degree scheme.
(c) Progress
Committee may also attach such conditions as seem likely to assist the future
progress of the student.
8.
Progress Procedures After Undergraduate Examinations for First and Second
Year Students (For these
purposes Foundation Years are
considered First Year schemes.)
Boards of
Examiners *
(*The term Board
of Examiners is also taken to mean Examinations
Committee.)
a)
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,. or MEng. criteria for deciding what
constitutes passing the first or second year.
b)
In June the Board of
Examiners 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 c) below in respect of each student:
c)
The
following progress decisions can be taken by the 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, 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 repeat the year of study. The
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;
v) 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
Board of Examiners. In these cases
the Board of Examiners may attach
such conditions to its decision as seems likely to assist the future progress of
the candidate;
vi)
to require the candidate
to withdraw.
d)
The
procedures following the September resit examinations will be the same as in
June except that the 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 c) above in
respect of each student
e)
The 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 Board of Examiners should refer the student to the Dean and
empower the Dean to act on its behalf within the terms of c)
above.
f)
A student may appeal
against the decision of a Board of Examiners in accordance with the procedures
set out in section 12 of this document.
9.
Progress Procedures for Students on Degree Schemes with a Year
Abroad
a)
All degree schemes for
which the Year Abroad comprises part of the assessment for the degree must 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.
b)
The Sub-committee has the
power to make progress decisions, subject to consultation with the relevant
External Examiner, within the terms of
paragraph 7 c) above in the case of unsatisfactory progress or if the
student's Year Abroad results are such that he or she would not be able to
obtain a degree at the end of the final year.
c)
A student may appeal
against the decision of a Sub-committee of a Board of Examiners in accordance
with the procedures set out in section 12 of this
document.
10. Extenuating
Circumstances
a)
Extenuating circumstances
are formally defined as: "circumstances beyond the student's control which cause
the student to perform less well in his or her coursework or examinations than
he or she might otherwise have been expected to do (on the basis of other
work). In general, extenuating
circumstances will be of a medical or personal nature affecting the student for
any significant period of time and/or during the examination period."
b)
At the time of examination
entry the Notes to Students will include advice about submitting an Extenuating
Circumstances form, about extenuating circumstances which may have affected work
during the year. Students should be
warned that failure to submit an Extenuating Circumstances form may mean that
the circumstances may not be taken into account by the
examiners.
c)
If a student informs a
member of staff that extenuating circumstances have affected a piece of
coursework he or she is submitting, the member of staff should tell the
student to submit an extenuating
circumstances form, failing which the extenuating circumstances may not be taken
into account by the examiners.
11. Procedure for
Appeals By An Undergraduate Or Taught-Course Postgraduate Student Against The
Decision Of A Progress Committee
a)
A student who wishes to
appeal against the decision of a Progress Committee must do so in writing to the
Academic Registrar, stating fully the grounds of the appeal, within 5 working
days of the date of the letter sent
informing the student of the Progress Committee's
decision.
b)
The grounds on which a
student may appeal are:
(i)
that there were procedural
irregularities in the conduct of the Progress Committee (including alleged
administrative error) of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to
whether the outcome might have been different had they not
occurred;
(ii)
that there was evidence of
extenuating circumstances which could not reasonably have been made available to
the Progress Committee, of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to
whether the result might have been different had they not
occurred.
c)
Any such appeal shall be
forwarded to the appropriate Pro-Vice-Chancellor, who may consult such persons
as he or she thinks fit, including the appellant, in arriving at a decision as
to whether or not the appeal is well-founded.
d)
If the Pro-Vice-Chancellor
decides that the appeal is not well-founded, he or she shall inform the student
in writing, stating his/her reasons for so deciding. The communication of this decision
shall, in such cases, constitute the formal dismissal of the
appeal.
e)
If the Pro-Vice-Chancellor
decides that the appeal is well-founded then the case shall be referred to the
Progress Appeal Panel.
f)
The Progress Appeal Panel
shall consist of not less than three Deans of Schools, excluding the Dean of the
School of which the student is a member.
g)
The student shall 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.
h)
If the student is unable
to attend the meeting of the Progress Appeal Panel, the meeting will go ahead
and the decisions taken will be valid.
i)
The members of the
Progress Appeal Panel will have the papers that were made available to the
original Progress Committee, together with the student's written statement of
the appeal, and documentary evidence to support any extenuating circumstances
put forward. It will be open to the
Progress Appeal Committee to call such witnesses as it thinks fit. The Dean of the School of which the
student is a member will have the right to appear before the Progress Appeal
Panel.
j)
After consideration of the
case the Progress Appeal Panel shall either dismiss the appeal or decide on one
of the courses of action defined under the Powers of Progress Committees listed
in section 7 of the Progress Procedures.
k)
The decision of the
Progress Appeal Panel 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.
l)
The decision of the
Progress Appeal Panel will be final.
12. Procedure for
Appeals against the Progress Decision of a Foundation, First or Second Year
Board of Examiners (The term Board
of Examiners is also taken to mean Examination Committee)
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.
a) For
Students Who Are Required To Withdraw Permanently
i)
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 action on behalf of the Board of Examiners to change
the original decision if the student presents appropriate new evidence to
support his or her case.
ii) 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.
iii) The Dean
will explain to the student the basis on which the 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 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.
b)
Consultation on other decisions of a Foundation, First or Second Year
Board of Examiners
i)
A students who has not been required to withdraw permanently but who is
considering an appeal against
another decision of the
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 action on behalf of the Board of Examiners to change the
original decision if the student presents appropriate new evidence to support
his or her case.
ii) 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
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.
c)
Procedure For Formal Appeal
i)
A student has the right to appeal against the progress decision of a
First or Second Year Board of Examiners 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:
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
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.
ii) 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.
iii) The student
must write to the Academic Registrar stating fully and precisely the grounds for
appeal, within ten 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.
iv) 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.
v) 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.
d)
School Appeals Committee
i)
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 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.
ii) 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.
iii) 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.
iv) The Appeals
Committee will be able to make any decision which was open to the original 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.
13. Procedures for
Appeals Against Second or Final Year or Taught Masters Degree Results
a)
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.
b)
Forms
of Appeal are available from the Academic Registrar, Undergraduate Schools
Office, Graduate School or Departmental Offices.
c)
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.
d)
The main legitimate
grounds for appeal are the following:
(i)
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.
(ii)
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.
e)
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:
(i)
Appeals against the
academic judgement of internal or external examiners. Coursework and examinations cannot be
remarked, except in cases of procedural irregularities.
(ii)
Informal assessments of
the student's work by members of academic staff.
(iii)
The retrospective
reporting of extenuating circumstances which a student might reasonably have
been expected to disclose to the Board of Examiners before their
meeting.
(iv)
Marginal failure to attain
a higher class of degree.
f)
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.
g)
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.
h)
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.
i)
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.
j)
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.
k)
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.
l)
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.
m)
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.
n)
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.
o)
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.
p)
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.
Appendix A
UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX
PROGRESS COMMITTEE
NOTE:
This
document, which is derived from the
Progress Procedures has no formal standing. It is issued to members of Progress
Committees and students appearing before them as a guide to the order of
proceedings.
The
Proceedings are likely to follow the pattern outlined below, although there may
be some variation between Schools of Study.
1.
The Chair opens the
meeting by introducing himself/herself and establishing the names and functions
of those in the room.
2.
Check that the student has
received the details of the case and any supporting
documentation.
3.
Explain the order of
proceedings to the student.
4.
Outline the case for
referral to Progress Committee.
5.
Invite the student to put
forward a case orally, if he/she wishes to do so.
6.
Invite the members of the
committee to put questions to the student.
7.
Invite the student's
representative to put forward any additional statement.
8.
Invite the student to
respond and state what his/her preferred outcome would be.
The student and his/her representative will then be
asked to leave the room. The
decision of the Progress Committee will be communicated to the student orally either immediately after the meeting,
or at another pre-arranged
time. Students will be sent written
confirmation of the decision of the Progress Committee.
Schools’ Offices
June 2001
|
dwC:\My
Documents\progress\progress-appeals-procedures-draft for
Senate.doc |
Appendix
E
REPORTING ARRANGEMENTS FOR
COMMITTEES WHICH PREVIOUSLY REPORTED TO ACADEMIC POLICY
COMMITTEE
|
School
Boards |
Report direct to Senate
|
|
Computing Service
Management Group |
Report to
ISSC |
|
Lifelong Learning Board
of Studies |
Report direct to
Senate |
|
Library
Committee |
Annual report to Senate,
with specific recommendations only at other
times |
|
Learning and Teaching
Committee |
Annual report to Senate
with specific proposals as appropriate to other
committees |
|
ISSC (Joint Committee of
Senate and Council) |
Report direct to Senate
(and Council) |
|
Lifelong Learning
Management Committee |
Report on financial
position termly to Budget Sub Committee and draw to BSC’s attention any
other relevant matters |
|
Centres Review
Committee |
Report to VAG after each
meeting and send annual report to Senate |
|
Ethics Committee
|
Annual report to
Senate |
n.b. Unless otherwise
stated, report with extract of relevant material, not full
minutes
REPORTING
ARRANGEMENTS FOR COMMITTEES WHICH HAVE PREVIOUSLY NOT HAD A FORMAL REPORTING
ROUTE
|
New Degree Scheme and
Recruitment Working Group |
Annual Report to Senate;
issues as appropriate to be taken for discussion at Boards and other
committees |
|
Key
Skills Steering Group |
Report to Learning and
Teaching Committee |
|
Widening
Participation Steering Group |
Annual Report to Senate;
issues as appropriate to be taken for discussion at Boards and other
committees |