Faculty Appeals Committee
Faculty Appeals CommitteePurpose of a Faculty Appeals Committee 33.(1) Each faculty must have an appeals committee to consider student appeals where there is dissatisfaction with an assessment result and/or progress status. (2) Appeals will only be heard from a student who has previously followed the procedures set out in these regulations for reconsideration of a result at the level of the head of school and dean, or higher degrees committee, as appropriate. Minutes of Meetings 34. The proceedings of each meeting of an appeals committee must be minuted, and the minutes must be made available to the student concerned, following confirmation by the members of the committee. Summary Dismissal of Appeals 35.(1) The chair of an appeals committee may summarily dismiss an appeal if— (a) in their judgement, the appeal is based solely on disagreement with an academic assessment made by a school and the evidence available shows that the assessment has been arrived at using the method described in the Assessment Mechanism Statement and provides no reason to suspect that the process of assessment was unfair; or (b) in their judgement, the appeal is based solely on a disagreement with the criteria used to determine the award of a progress status; or (c) in their judgement, the appeal is based solely on a disagreement with the criteria for the application of scaling or other adjustment systems rather than the application of these criteria; or (d) in their judgement, the appeal is based solely on a disagreement with the content of the Assessment Mechanism Statement rather than on adherence thereto; or (e) the student submitting the appeal has not already appealed at the level of head of school and/or dean, or higher degrees committee, as required in these Regulations; or (f) in their judgement, the stated reasons for the appeal are so wide or imprecise that there is no reasonable case for consideration; or (g) the student has not replied to a request for additional information within twelve University working days, or within a longer period if a longer period has been allowed in light of special circumstances. (2) If the chair decides to dismiss an appeal summarily, they must advise the student in writing within twelve University working days, following the submission of an appeal in accordance with Regulation 31, giving the reason(s) for the decision. Constitution of Faculty Appeals Committees 36.(1) A faculty appeals committee will comprise: (a) the Chair of the Academic Board or nominee, as Chair; (b) a dean, deputy dean, associate dean or sub-dean of another faculty, appointed by the Chair of the Academic Board; (c) two (one from each faculty in the case of a combined course student) senior academic members of the faculty appointed annually by the faculty, or if either or both are unavailable to serve, alternatives drawn from a panel of at least five senior academic members of the faculty elected by the faculty each year in terms of sub-Regulation 38(1)(b); and (d) one student, appointed by the faculty on the recommendation of the faculty's student association(s), provided that— (i) if that person is unavailable or ineligible to serve, an alternative must be drawn from the panel of three students elected by the faculty each year in terms of sub-Regulation 38(1)(a); (ii) if the appeal relates to a postgraduate case, the student must be drawn from the panel of postgraduate students referred to in sub-Regulation 38(2). (2) A person with a direct interest in or previous involvement in the case is ineligible to serve on the committee. Quorum 37.(1) The quorum for an appeals committee is the full committee. (2) The chair has both an ordinary and a casting vote. Panels 38.(1) Each year each faculty must elect two panels as follows: (a) a panel of three undergraduate students to be drawn on as necessary in terms of sub-paragraph 36(1)(d)(i); and (b) a panel of at least five senior academics who are members of the faculty to be drawn on as necessary in terms of paragraph 36(1)(c). (2) For each faculty, the Postgraduate Students' Association will elect a panel of three postgraduate students for endorsement by the faculty. (3) Members of the panels will be numbered sequentially and will be called upon to serve in order of their numbering. (4) If an eligible alternative member, or eligible alternative members, cannot be provided when necessary from the appropriate elected panel, the chair of the committee will appoint a person from the requisite category to serve on the committee. Conduct of the Appeal 39.(1) The conduct of an appeal is at the discretion of the appeals committee, but with the following conditions: (a) if the student has previously appealed to a faculty higher degrees committee— (i) the chair of the higher degrees committee must submit all papers relating to the appeal at higher degrees committee level for inclusion in the agenda for the appeals committee; (ii) the chair of the higher degrees committee must be invited to the appeal committee meeting to explain the higher degrees committee's determination on the case; (iii) the agenda and all attachments must be sent to the student at the same time as they are sent to committee members; and (iv) the student must be invited to appear before the committee and to be accompanied by a Guild Education Officer, Head of the School of Indigenous Studies or by a person nominated by either party; (b) in all cases other than those described in paragraph (a)— (i) where applicable, the head of the school concerned must submit all papers relating to the appeal at school level for inclusion in the agenda for the appeals committee; (ii) the dean concerned must submit all papers relating to the appeal at dean level for inclusion in the agenda for the appeals committee; (iii) the agenda and all attached papers must be sent to the student at the same time as they are sent to committee members; (iv) the head of school or nominee must be invited to attend the appeal committee meeting to explain the school determination in a case relating to an appeal against academic assessment; (v) the dean or nominee, and sub-dean and/or head of school in the case of an appeal against the result of an application for special consideration or against the award of a progress status, must be invited to attend the appeal committee meeting to explain the earlier determination made on the case; and (vi) the student must be invited to appear before the committee and to be accompanied by, and, if they wish, represented by a Guild Education Officer, Head of the School of Indigenous Studies or a person nominated by either party. (2) If the committee considers it appropriate, the appeal may be heard in the presence of the student, any person accompanying the student and the invited staff member(s). Alternative Process 40. If the Registrar is satisfied that it would be impractical for a student to appear before a faculty appeals committee constituted and conducted in accordance with Regulations 33 to 36, the Registrar must determine an alternative process to ensure that the student has an opportunity to present a case to those charged with hearing the appeal. Action Following the Meeting of the Faculty Appeals Committee 41.(1) If the faculty appeals committee is not satisfied that the appeal has been fairly dealt with, it must require the dean, or the chair of the higher degrees committee, as appropriate, to make immediate arrangements for— (a) the review of the process by which— (i) the result of the application for special consideration was arrived at; or (ii) the award of the progress status was made; or (iii) the scaling or other adjustment systems were applied; or (iv) the adherence or otherwise to the Assessment Mechanism Statement has been determined; or (b) review in the case of an appeal against assessment; and to report and to make a recommendation, within a period specified by the committee, on the outcome of the review or reassessment. (2) The committee may require the chair of a higher degrees committee to refer a thesis or dissertation to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University to further inform the academic judgement of the higher degrees committee, and, having done so, to provide, as part of the report required by sub-Regulation (1) a summary of all assessments made to date, and a rationale for the result recommended. (3) The committee, through the dean, may require a head of school to refer the work to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University to further inform the academic judgement of the school, and, having done so, to provide, through the dean, as part of the report required by sub-Regulation (1) a summary of all assessments made to date, and a rationale for the result recommended. (4) If a committee requires that a piece of work be reviewed or referred to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University, the committee must also require that the chair of the higher degrees committee or the head of school, as appropriate, provide the other assessor(s) with a copy of the piece of work from which the student's name has been deleted, but which indicates the mark awarded, and preserves any comments made by the original assessor. (5) When complying with the provisions of sub-Regulation (4) the chair of the higher degrees committee or head of school must also— (a) where possible provide to the other assessor(s) for the purposes of comparison copies of the same piece of work completed by two or more other students from which the students' names have been deleted, but which indicate the marks awarded, and preserve any comments made by the original assessor and where possible, are sufficiently close to but differentiated from the appellant's mark as to provide a reasonable point of comparison; (b) ensure that the appellant's work is identified as such; (c) request the other assessor(s) to— (i) rank the pieces of work in order of relative merit; (ii) indicate whether the mark awarded to the appellant's work was reasonable; (d) ensure that the other assessor(s) are aware of the expected standard of work and criteria against which this should be judged; (e) provide an explanation from the original marker as to why the mark was awarded; and (f) provide a copy of the Appeal Form lodged by the student setting out the grounds on which the appeal is made. (6) It is the responsibility of the chair of the higher degrees committee or head of school, as appropriate, to try to ensure that any external assessors appointed have no connection with any of the staff or students of the school, beyond professional acquaintance within the academic community, and to request the assessors, in submitting their assessment, to sign a statement confirming that position. (7) If it is not possible for the chair of the higher degrees committee or head of school, as appropriate, to find an external assessor who does not have a connection with any of the staff and students of the school, beyond professional acquaintance within the academic community, the chair or head, as appropriate, must document the reasons for not being able to do so. (8) If after receipt of the report and recommendation of the dean or the chair of the higher degrees committee, as appropriate, the appeals committee is satisfied that the reassessment has been fairly arrived at, the dean must confirm or amend the assessment, within the limits of the authority conferred on him or her by the board of examiners. (9) If after receipt of the report of the dean or chair of the higher degrees committee, the appeals committee is not satisfied that the reassessment has been fairly arrived at, it may either— (a) arrange a meeting with the chair of the higher degrees committee or the dean and head of school, as appropriate, in an effort to resolve, or find a means of resolving, the matter; or (b) require the dean or the chair of the higher degrees committee, as appropriate, to take further steps in regard to reassessment; or (c) refer the matter, via the chair of the faculty appeals committee, in appropriate cases, for consideration by the board of examiners who must make a final decision on the mark to be awarded. (10) If after receipt of the report and recommendation as referred to in Regulation 41(1), the appeals committee is not satisfied that the result of the application for special consideration or the award of the progress status or the application of scaling or other adjustment systems has been fairly arrived at, it may refer the matter back to the board of examiners in order that they may— (a) in the case of an appeal against the award of a progress status, vary that progress status; (b) in the case of an appeal against the result of an application for special consideration, vary the level of special consideration granted; or (c) in the case of an appeal against the application of scaling or other adjustment systems amend the final mark. (11) If after receipt of the report and recommendation as referred to in Regulation 41(1), the appeals committee is of the opinion that there has been non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement, it may consider the implications of this non-adherence, which may lead to a referral of the work involved back to the head of school for reassessment in accordance with Regulation 21(3). Advice to Student of Outcome 42.(1) The chair of the committee must advise the student in writing of the committee's decision and of further avenues of appeal if the decision is not in favour of the student. (2) The chair's letter to the student must be copied to the head of school and/or dean or chair of the higher degrees committee, as appropriate. 43. Except as provided in Regulation 45, the decision of the committee is final and it will not engage in any further correspondence with the student. Power to Make Recommendations on Matters of General Concern 44.(1) The chair of an appeals committee has the power to make recommendations to deans on matters of general concern arising from appeals to faculty appeals committees, with a copy to the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning), and to seek a report on the action taken as a result of these recommendations. (2) The chair of an appeals committee may also recommend to the Registrar that these Regulations be reviewed in light of matters of general concern arising from appeals to faculty appeals committees. |