General Provisions

Unit Assessment Mechanism Statements

1.(1) For each unit offered within a course in the University, the school(s) responsible for the unit must make available to students, by the second week of the semester in which it is offered, a clear written statement of the details of the assessment mechanism for the unit.

(2) The Assessment Mechanism Statement must be available to each student from the school office on request.

(3) For any unit in which the assessment mechanism is the subject of an agreement between the assessor or supervisor and an individual student, a written agreement must be drawn up before the end of the third week of the semester/year concerned and must be signed by both parties and lodged immediately after signature with the head of school concerned.

(4) The Guild of Undergraduates or the Postgraduate Students' Association, as appropriate, may recommend to the appropriate dean, in writing, with a copy to the Chair of the Academic Board, that a matter of policy relating to the assessment mechanism for a unit offered by a school be investigated, and may seek a report on the outcome of the investigation.

Responsibility of Schools in Relation to Assessment

2.(1) The responsibility for determining the mechanism for assessment of a unit lies with the school offering the unit, which must comply with current University and faculty assessment policies.

(2) The responsibility for the process of assessment of assignments and examinations contributing to the final result in a unit lies with the school offering the unit, which must comply with current University and faculty assessment policies.

Responsibility for Determining Criteria for the Award of a Progress Status

3. The responsibility for determining the criteria for the award of a progress status lies with the faculty responsible for the course and the criteria are published in the relevant Faculty Rules.

Responsibility for the Application of Scaling or Other Adjustment Systems

4. The responsibility for the application of scaling or other adjustment systems lies with the faculty responsible for the unit and the criteria are published in the relevant faculty policy document.

Responsibility of Boards of Examiners/Faculty

5. In terms of University General Rule 1.2.1.23(3), the responsibility for considering final results in units and reporting them to the Registrar lies with the faculties’ boards of examiners.

Responsibilities of Deans and Appeals Committees

6.(1) In the case of an appeal against assessment deans and faculty appeals committees have authority, and responsibility, to satisfy themselves that a fair process was used to determine an assessment, and, if necessary, to require a head of school to—

(a)(i) review the assessment; and/or

(ii) refer the work to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University to further inform the academic judgement of the school; and

(b) resubmit a result.

(2) If a dean or appeals committee requires that a piece of work be referred to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University, the dean or committee must also require that the head of school 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.

(3) When complying with the provisions of sub-Regulation (2) the 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 preserves 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; and

(e) provide an explanation from the original assessor 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.

(4) Deans and faculty appeals committees have authority, and responsibility, to satisfy themselves that a fair process was used to determine the award of a progress status, the determination of the level of special consideration granted, the application of scaling or other adjustment systems or the adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement.

Rights of Students

7.(1) Given the provisions of sub-Regulation (2), a student has the right to lodge, at school level, an appeal which challenges the school's academic judgement in arriving at an assessment but only has the right to pursue an appeal beyond that level if they have reason to believe that the process which led to the disputed academic judgement was unfair in their individual case.

(2) In an appeal at the school level, a student may—

(a) submit their assignment for comparison with that of another student who has received a higher grade for the same assignment; or

(b) ask that a head of school arrange for comparison of an assignment or examination script with that of another student who has received a higher grade for the same assignment or script.

Responsibilities of Students

8. Students must recognise that they have a responsibility not to make frivolous claims and to take note of the grounds for summary dismissal of appeals as outlined in Regulation 35(1).

Rights of Schools

9. Where the process of assessment is shown to have been fair in an individual case, a school assessment must not be changed as a result of an appeal to a dean or faculty appeals committee.

Delegation of Powers of Boards of Examiners and Faculties to Deans

10.(1) Subject to the agreement of the faculty concerned, a board of examiners may delegate to the dean the power to—

(a) amend a result approved by a board of examiners if such amendment is recommended by a head of school after the processes set out in these Regulations have been followed; and

(b) as a result of an amendment referred to in (a), amend any unsatisfactory progress status imposed by the faculty, as appropriate, in line with faculty policy.

(2) A dean may, in any particular case, choose to refer a recommended change back to the board of examiners for consideration.

Filing of Documentation

11.(1) All documentation relating to a formal appeal at the school level must be filed in the school concerned and on the University student file in accordance with general University procedures.

(2) All documentation relating to an appeal at the level of dean will be filed in the faculty office concerned and on the University student file in accordance with general University procedures.

(3) All documentation relating to an appeal to a faculty appeals committee will be placed on the University student file and on the appropriate Faculty Appeals file in Central Records in accordance with general University procedures.

Separate Consideration of Appeals

12.(1) Each separate appeal must be considered on its merits, without reference to other appeals submitted previously or simultaneously.

(2) The various levels of consideration of an appeal against a result do not constitute separate appeals.

Extension of Appeal Deadlines

13.(1) Despite the deadlines set out in these Regulations for the submission of an appeal at each level of the Process, the head of school has the discretion to extend the specified deadline for submission of an appeal at the school level, the dean of a faculty has the discretion to extend the specified deadline for submission of an appeal below the level of a faculty appeals committee, and the chair of the appeals committee has the discretion to extend the normal deadline for submission of an appeal to a faculty appeals committee, where a student shows that exceptional circumstances apply.

(2) A student who seeks an extension of the deadline for submission of an appeal at any level must lodge a written request with the head of school, dean or chair of the appeals committee, as appropriate, giving the reasons for seeking the extension, and must lodge a copy of the request with the faculty administrative officer.

(3) The head of school, dean or chair of the appeals committee, as appropriate, must advise the student in writing of their decision, giving reasons if the request is denied, and must give a copy of their written decision to the faculty administrative officer.

(4) The decision of the head of school, dean or chair of the appeals committee not to allow an extension may be appealed to the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Teaching and Learning) in the case of undergraduate students and postgraduate coursework students, or the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Research and Research Training) in the case of postgraduate research students, and their decision will be final.

Scope of Appeal Outcome

14.(1) An appeal against academic assessment may result in an amendment that may be either an increase or a decrease in the mark originally awarded.

(2) An appeal against the award of a progress status may result in an amendment to the progress status originally awarded.

(3) An appeal against the result of an application for special consideration may result in an amendment in the mark originally awarded.

(4) An appeal against the application of scaling or other adjustment systems may result in an amendment that may be either an increase or decrease in the mark originally awarded.

(5) An appeal against non-adherence to an Assessment Mechanism Statement may result in an amendment that may be either an increase or decrease in the mark originally awarded.

(6) In respect of sub-Regulations (1), (3), (4) and (5), where an amendment results in a decrease in the mark originally awarded, the amendment will be guided by the principles outlined in the University's 'Policy on Amendment of Examination Results and Other Academic Decisions Found to be in Error after Formal Notification to Students' (see Appendix 1) in order that a student is not unduly disadvantaged.

(7) Where an appeal by an individual student brings to light an error which can be reasonably considered to affect the results of the entire, or any part of, the cohort of students involved, any consequent amendments to the results of the other students will be guided by the principles outlined in the University's 'Policy on Amendment of Examination Results and Other Academic Decisions Found to be in Error after Formal Notification to Students' (see Appendix 1) in order that an individual student is not unduly disadvantaged.

The Appeal

15. A formal appeal must be submitted on an appeal form which can be obtained from the faculty office or on the Web at: http://www.secretariat.uwa.edu.au/page/20777.

Student Responsibilities in Submitting Appeals

16.(1) In submitting an appeal, a student must provide a clear written statement giving the reasons for the appeal.

(2) In an appeal above the level of head of school, a student must provide good reasons for believing that the process of assessment was unfair in their case.

(3) In complying with sub-Regulation (2) a student may comment on the circumstances which, in their view, lead to the alleged unfairness.

Staff Responsibilities to Declare an Interest, or Perceived Interest, in an Appeal

17. Any staff member who is aware of having previous involvement or a direct interest in, or a possible perceived direct interest in, the outcome of an appeal, must declare that interest to the appropriate person (depending on the level of the appeal) and take no part in the determination of the appeal.

Regulations Relating to All Students Appealing against Results in Coursework Units

18. For a student wishing to appeal against results in coursework units, including Higher Degree by Research preliminary, master’s and professional doctorate students, the procedures for appeal are those set out in Regulations 20 to 48.

Regulations for Postgraduate Students Appealing against Annual or Final Dissertation or Thesis Results Determined by Higher Degrees Committees or their Equivalent

19. For students enrolled in faculty-administered Higher Degree by Research preliminary courses, master's degrees by research and those enrolled in master's degrees by coursework or in professional doctorates who wish to appeal against an annual or final result for a thesis or dissertation, which has been determined by the higher degrees committee of a faculty, or equivalent, the processes for appeal are as follows:

(1) The student must submit an appeal form to the chair of the higher degrees committee of the faculty concerned.

(2) The higher degrees committee will consider the appeal and the chair will provide the student with written advice of the outcome and the reasons for it.

(3) If the student is not satisfied with the outcome of the appeal, the processes set out in Regulation 31 onwards will apply.

Appeal Against Academic Assessment at School Level

Submission of Appeal Form

20. If after seeking informal feedback, including an arithmetical check, on a result issued by the University, a student believes they have reasons for appeal against the result, they must within twenty* University working days of the release of the formal result submit an appeal form to the head of the school concerned, with a copy to the faculty office concerned.

* Students are strongly encouraged to lodge their appeal at the earliest possible date—preferably within twelve University working days of the release of the formal results—in order to enhance the possibility of the appeals process being finalised prior to the start of the next semester.

Responsibilities of Head of School

21.(1) The head of school must consider whether the process of assessment used to arrive at the disputed result was satisfactory and whether there is reason to question the academic judgement which gave rise to the result.

(2) If the head of school is satisfied that the process of assessment used to arrive at the disputed result was satisfactory, the appeal is not upheld. The head of school must inform the student in writing of this outcome and also advise the student of the next step in the appeals process (see Regulations 23-26).

(3) If the head of school is not satisfied that the disputed result is fair in all the circumstances, then the head must ensure that appropriate action is taken as soon as possible to have the mark reviewed, or in exceptional circumstances, the work reassessed.

Review by the original assessor

(4) Where the head of school is not satisfied that the process of assessment used to arrive at the disputed result was satisfactory, the head must first consult with the original assessor to ascertain the reasons why the mark was awarded and to request a re-assessment of the work if appropriate.

(5) The head of school must inform the student in writing of the outcome of this review, normally within 20 University working days of receipt of the appeal.

(6) If the student and/or head of school is not satisfied with the outcome of the review by the original assessor, the student may request that the piece of work be referred, or the head of school may refer the piece of work, to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University.

Review by another assessor

(7) If the head of school refers a piece of work to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University for re-assessment, the head must 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.

(8) The 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.

(9) It is the responsibility of the head of school to try to ensure that any external assessors used by the school have no connection with any of its staff or students, beyond professional acquaintance within the academic community, and to request the assessors, in submitting their assessment, to sign a statement confirming that position.

(10) If it is not possible for the head of school 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 head must document the reasons for not being able to do so.

(11) If after work has been reviewed, the head of school proposes to change a student's final result, the head must inform the dean in writing, giving a brief explanation of the way in which the work was reviewed and the reason for the recommended change. Any change in a Progress Status that arises from a change in mark must be made. The head of school must also inform the student in writing.

(12) If after the work has been reviewed, the head of school determines that no change to the student's result is warranted, they will, if possible, inform the student in person, with a follow-up in writing, copied to the faculty office, giving a brief explanation of the way in which the work was reviewed.

(13) If the student is not available to be advised in person, the head of school must inform the student in writing as required in sub-Regulation (12).

(14) If the head of school has been involved in the assessment under appeal, they must request the dean to refer the appeal to another senior academic staff member of the school who will act in place of the head for the purposes of these Regulations.

(15) If the head of school is the same person as the dean, they must nominate another senior academic staff member of the school to act in place of the head for the purposes of these Regulations.

Responsibility of Dean

22. The dean will take whatever action is appropriate, within the limits of their delegated authority from the board of examiners or faculty, in relation to any change to a result arising from a head of school's recommendation, and must advise the student in writing of the action taken.

Appeal to the Dean

This is the first level at which the following are submitted:

(a) appeals against the award of a progress status;

(b) appeals against the result of a request for special consideration;

(c) appeals against the application of scaling or other adjustment systems; and

(d) appeals against non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement.

Submission of Appeal Form

23.(1) A student who is not satisfied with—

(a) the outcome of an appeal against academic assessment to a head of school; or

(b) the process ² used by the board of examiners to determine the award of a progress status; or

(c) the result of an application for special consideration in relation to an individual student;

(d) the application of scaling or other adjustment systems ³; or

(e) the non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement for the unit;

and who wishes to pursue the appeal on the grounds that the process was unfair in their case, must submit an appeal form to the dean.

² A student should inform themselves of this process via the recommended informal action as outlined above.

³ A student should inform themselves of this process via the recommended informal action as outlined above.

Which Dean?

24.(1) Students appeal to the dean of the faculty responsible for the course in which they are enrolled.

(2) In the case of a student enrolled in a combined course for two degrees—

(a)(i) where the appeal is against academic assessment, the application of scaling or other adjustment systems or non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement for the unit, the appeal must be made to the dean of the faculty responsible for the degree course of which the disputed unit is a part;

(ii) where a unit may be considered part of both courses, both deans must consult and agree on which dean is to handle the appeal;

(b) in the case of an appeal against the award of a progress status, or against the result of an application for special consideration, the appeal must be made to the dean responsible for the the degree course which comprises the greater part of the student’s enrolment in the current academic year.

Time Limit

25. The form must be lodged—

(a) within twelve University working days of the date of notification of the outcome of the appeal lodged in accordance with Regulation 20; or

(b) within twenty* University working days of—

(i) the outcome of a request for special consideration; or

(ii) the release of the formal results in the case of an appeal under Regulation 22(a), (c) and/or (d).

(Note: notification of progress status is available at the same time as the formal results are released but is on a separate page in StudentConnect).

* Students are strongly encouraged to lodge their appeal at the earliest possible date—preferably within twelve University working days of the release of the formal results—in order to enhance the possibility of the appeals process being finalised prior to the start of the next semester.

Responsibility of the Dean in an Appeal against Academic Assessment

26.(1) The dean must consider whether the student’s appeal has been fairly dealt with at the school level.

(2) If the dean is not satisfied that the appeal has been fairly dealt with they will require the head of school concerned to make immediate arrangements for review, to report on the outcome, and to make a recommendation, within a specified period.

(3) If a dean requires, in terms of sub-Regulation (2), that a piece of work be reviewed and/or referred to an/other assessor(s) within or outside the University, the dean must also require that the head of school 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.

(4) When complying with the provisions of sub-Regulation (3) the dean or head of school must also—

(a) where possible, provide to the other assessor(s) 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.

(5) It is the responsibility of the head of school to try to ensure that any external assessors used by the school have no connection with any of its staff or students, beyond professional acquaintance within the academic community, and to request the assessors, in submitting their assessment, to sign a statement confirming that position.

(6) If it is not possible for the head of school to find an external assessor who does not have a connection with any of the staff or students of the school, beyond professional acquaintance within the academic community, the head must document the reasons for not being able to do so.

(7) If, following receipt of the report and recommendation of the head of school, the dean is satisfied that the recommended assessment of the head of school has been fairly arrived at, they will confirm or amend the assessment, and confirm or amend any related progress status as appropriate, within the limits of authority conferred on them by the board of examiners.

(8) If, following receipt of the report and recommendation of the head of school, the dean is not satisfied that the recommended assessment of the head of school has been fairly arrived at, they must refer the student's appeal form to the faculty appeals committee for consideration.

(9) The dean will provide each student who has appealed under sub-Regulation (1) with written advice of the outcome, including a brief explanation of the reasons for the outcome.

Responsibility of the Dean in an Appeal against Progress Status

27. (1) The dean will seek a report from the sub-dean, or sub-deans in the case of a student undertaking a combined course, on the process used by the board of examiners to determine the award of the progress status.

(2) If, following receipt of the report of under (1), the dean is satisfied that the recommended progress status has been fairly arrived at, they will confirm the progress status, within the limits of authority conferred on them by the board of examiners.

(3) If, following receipt of the report of the sub-dean(s), the dean is not satisfied that the recommended progress status has been fairly arrived at, they must refer the student's appeal form to the Board of Examiners for consideration.

(4) The dean will provide each student who has appealed with written advice of the outcome including a brief explanation of the reasons for the outcome.

Responsibility of the Dean in an Appeal against the Result of Special Consideration Application

28.(1) The dean will seek—

(a) in the case of special consideration for a unit, a report from the sub-dean and/or head of school on the process used in determining the level of special consideration applied in that unit; or

(b) in the case of special consideration for the award of a progress status, a report on the process used to determine the level of special consideration to be applied in the award of the progress status.

(2) If, following receipt of the report, the dean is satisfied that the final mark for a unit or progress status has been fairly arrived at, they will confirm the mark or progress status, within the limits of authority conferred on them by the board of examiners.

(3) If, following receipt of the report, the dean is not satisfied that the recommended final mark or progress status has been fairly arrived at, they must refer the student's appeal form to the board of examiners for consideration.

(4) The dean will provide each student who has appealed with written advice of the outcome, including a brief explanation of the reasons for the outcome.

Responsibility of the Dean in an Appeal against the Application of Scaling or Other Adjustment Systems

29.(1) The dean will seek a report from the sub-dean and/or head of school on the process used in the application of the scaling or other adjustment systems.

(2) If, following receipt of the report under (1), the dean is satisfied that the final mark has been fairly arrived at, they will confirm the mark, within the limits of authority conferred on them by the board of examiners.

(3) If, following receipt of the report, the dean is not satisfied that the recommended final mark or progress status has been fairly arrived at, they must refer the student's appeal form to the board of examiners for consideration.

(4) The dean will provide each student who has appealed, with written advice of the outcome, including a brief explanation of the reasons for the outcome.

Responsibility of the Dean in an Appeal against Non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement for the Unit

30.(1) The dean will seek a report from the sub-dean and/or head of school on the assessment process used and that laid down in the Assessment Mechanism Statement for the unit/course.

(2) If, following receipt of the report under (1), the dean is satisfied that the final mark has been fairly arrived at, they will confirm the mark, within the limits of authority conferred on them by the board of examiners.

(3) If, following receipt of the report, the dean is not satisfied that the recommended final mark or progress status has been fairly arrived at, they must refer the student's appeal form to the board of examiners for consideration.

(4) The dean will provide each student who has appealed, with written advice of the outcome, including a brief explanation of the reasons for the outcome.

Appeal to Faculty Appeals Committee

Submission of Appeal Form

31.(1) A student who is not satisfied with the outcome of an appeal to a dean or a faculty higher degrees committee and still wishes to pursue the appeal because they believe that the process of assessment was unfair in their case must submit a written request to the faculty administrative officer that the appeal form previously submitted to the dean or higher degrees committee be forwarded to the appeals committee of the faculty responsible for the course in which they are enrolled.

(2) In the case of a student enrolled in a combined course for two degrees—

(a)(i) where the appeal is against academic assessment, the application of scaling or other adjustment systems or non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement for the unit, the appeal must be made to the dean of the faculty responsible for the degree course of which the disputed unit is a part;

(ii) where a unit may be considered part of both courses, both deans must consult and agree on which dean is to handle the appeal.

(b) in the case of an appeal against the award of a progress status, or against the result of an application for special consideration, the appeal must be made to the dean responsible for the degree course which comprises the greater part of the student's enrolment in the current academic year.

(3) The student may attach new information to the written request only if it relates to the reason(s) for the appeal which were put forward in the appeal to the dean or higher degrees committee.

(4) The student may include a relevant written submission from another person who may be a Guild Education Officer, the Head of the School of Indigenous Studies, or any other person, including a legal practitioner, who in the student's opinion is likely to be able to assist the committee in its enquiry.

Time Limit

32.The request to forward the appeal form to the faculty appeals committee must be lodged with the faculty administrative officer no later than twelve University working days after the date of notification of the outcome of the appeal to the dean or higher degrees committee as appropriate.

Faculty Appeals Committee

Purpose 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.

Appeal to the Vice-Chancellor Against Procedural Irregularity by a Faculty Appeals Committee

45.(1) A student who believes that a faculty appeals committee or its chair has operated irregularly, in a procedural sense may appeal in writing to the Vice-Chancellor.

(2) A student who wishes to appeal to the Vice-Chancellor must lodge that appeal within 12 University working days of notification of the outcome of an appeal to the faculty appeals committee, and must clearly identify the procedural irregularity which they believe the faculty appeals committee has committed.

(3) The Vice-Chancellor or nominee will enquire into the procedure of the faculty appeals committee, in the light of the content of the written appeal.

(4) If the Vice-Chancellor or nominee is satisfied that the faculty appeals committee concerned has not acted irregularly in any significant way in the conduct of the appeal, he or she will inform the student accordingly.

(5) If the Vice-Chancellor or nominee finds that there was some procedural irregularity in the conduct of the appeal, he or she may—

(a) require the faculty to arrange for a faculty appeals committee with a completely revised membership, including a chair appointed by the Vice-Chancellor, to hear the appeal again; or

(b) if he or she believes that no useful purpose will be served by reference back to a revised faculty appeals committee, establish a University appeals committee to hear the appeal.

Appointment of University Appeals Committee

(6) An appeals committee established in terms of paragraph (5)(a) must be provided with exactly the same material as was provided to the original committee but must not be given the minutes of the original meeting.

(7) An appeals committee established in terms of paragraph 5(b) will comprise at least three members appointed by the Vice-Chancellor or nominee, including a student, and will be provided with all documentation relating to the earlier appeal.

46. Except as otherwise specified in these Regulations, Regulations 36 to 43 apply to a faculty appeals committee established in terms of sub-Regulation 45(5)(a) and a University appeals committee established in terms of sub-Regulation 45(5)(b).

Power of a University Appeals Committee to Determine an Academic Result

47.(1) A University appeals committee has the power to determine an academic result which is based on the advice of acknowledged external experts in the discipline concerned, given after receiving work submitted by other students in the unit (or in the case of a thesis or dissertation, in the discipline) together with information on the grades/marks awarded for that work.

(2) A University appeals committee may vary the level of special consideration granted or a progress status.

(3) A University appeals committee may amend the final mark in the case where a scaling or other adjustment system has been found to have been incorrectly applied.

(4) A University appeals committee may determine an academic result in terms of sub-Regulation (1) in the case where there has been non-adherence to the Assessment Mechanism Statement.

48. A decision of a University Appeals Committee is final within the University.

Appeals Outside the University

49. A student who has exhausted the avenues of appeal available within the University may pursue their case through any appropriate government body or official.