2002-2003 Calendar
Table of Contents |
|
|
|
Faculty of Arts |
|
|
|
Faculty of Education |
|
|
Faculty
of Environmental Studies |
|
|
Faculty
of Fine Arts |
|
|
|
Faculty
of Pure and Applied Science |
|
|
|
Atkinson Faculty of Liberal
and Professional Studies |
|
|
Osgoode Hall Law School |
|
|
Schulich School of Business
|
|
|
Courses
of Instruction |
|
|
|
Glendon
College |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principles Regarding Grade Reappraisals
1. Students may, with sufficient academic grounds,
request that a final grade in a course be reappraised (which may
mean the review of specific pieces of tangible work). Non-academic
grounds are not relevant for grade reappraisals; in such cases,
students are advised to petition to their home Faculty. Students
are normally expected to first contact the course director to discuss
the grade received and to request that their tangible work be reviewed.
Tangible work may include written, graphic, digitized, modelled,
video recording or audio recording formats, but not oral work.
Students need to be aware that a request for
a grade reappraisal may result in the original grade being raised,
lowered or confirmed.
2. In the event that students are still not satisfied
with the final grade or the course director is not available to
review the work, they may submit in writing a formal request for
a grade reappraisal to the department or unit in which the course
is offered*. The Senate-approved deadline for submitting
grade reappraisals is within three weeks of the release of final
grade reports in any term. Exercising discretion about minor delays
in meeting the deadline which result from slow mail delivery or
extraordinary circumstances is reasonable.
*The exceptions are as follows:
- for Osgoode, Schulich, and the Faculty of Education the requests
for reappraisal are submitted to the office of the relevant Associate
Dean.
3. If the condition of sufficient academic grounds
has been met, the relevant department committee, department Chair,
associate dean or graduate/undergraduate program director will be
responsible for ensuring that the work is reappraised by an appropriate
faculty member, ensuring anonymity of both the student and the reappraiser,
and for communicating the result of the reappraisal (including the
reappraiser's comments) and the route of appeal to both the student
and the course director. The reappraiser will be given the nature
of the assignment and the rationale for the original grade. It is
expected that every effort will be made to render the decision within
30 days of the reviewer having received the work.
4. Parties to the decision may appeal a negative
decision on a request for a reappraisal, or the result of the reappraisal
itself to a Faculty-level appeals committee in the Faculty in which
the course is offered (or, in the case of the Faculty of Graduate
Studies, to the dean) only on the ground of procedural irregularity.
Procedural irregularity is defined as:
- actions taken or not taken by a department, Faculty, graduate
program officers, committees, or members with respect to the previous
disposition of the case which violate or nullify one or all of
the following:
- a) normal and written procedures of the University, Faculty,
graduate program or department concerned;
- b) consistency in the Faculty's, graduate program's or department's
handling of cases substantially similar to that being appealed;
- c) principles of equity, natural justice or fairness, whether
or not such violation occurred in accord with written or customary
procedures. Appeals based on allegations of these last procedural
irregularities should allege and demonstrate obvious bias or other
misbehaviour on the part of the officers or agents of the University
and for which redress was not provided by an authority which considered
the case prior to the appeal.
Appeals must be submitted within 21 days of notification
of the decision. Faculty committees may waive that deadline when
special circumstances are established by the appellant. No member
of the Faculty committee shall consider an appeal if s/he considered
the matter at an earlier level. At the discretion of the Faculty
committee, the student and/or the faculty member may be invited
to meet with the committee to present his/her case orally. The committee's
decision will be taken in camera and it is expected that parties
will be informed of the decision in writing within 30 days of the
filing of the appeal.
5. Parties to the appeal at the Faculty level
may file an application for leave to appeal the decision to the
Senate Appeals Committee (SAC) on the ground of procedural irregularity
at the Faculty level. Applications for leave to appeal must be submitted
within 21 days of the notification of the Faculty decision. SAC
may waive that deadline when special circumstances are established
by the appellant. No member of SAC shall consider the application
if s/he considered the matter at an earlier level. As explained
in the SAC procedures, parties may appear before the Committee if
leave to appeal is granted to make oral submissions on the ground
of procedural irregularity. The Committee's decision will be taken
in camera and it is expected that the parties will be informed of
the decision in writing within 30 days of the filing of the application.
6. Parties to the decision of the Senate Appeals
Committee may apply to the committee to have the matter reconsidered
if there is evidence of procedural irregularity on the part of SAC.
Applications must be submitted within 21 days of the posting of
the decision. SAC reserves the right to waive this deadline in special
circumstances. Requests for reconsideration of a SAC decision will
be considered by a panel of SAC members who did not serve on the
panel first hearing the matter; it is expected that a decision will
be rendered within 30 days of its submission.
|