APPEALS AGAINST DECISIONS OF BOARDS OF EXAMINERS AND THE RESEARCH DEGREES COMMITTEE (Regulation 7)

(Guidance Notes)

Any reference in this regulation to the Director of Planning and Academic Administration, Head of Department/School, or other named officer of the University shall be deemed to include refeence to any person designated by that officer for the purpose. Any reference in these regulations to the Chair sja;; ne deemed to include a reference to the Deputy Chair.

1. Academic appeals are appeals against the recommendations to Senate of

(i) Boards of Examiners properly constituted in accordance with University Regulation 9, and

(ii) the Research Degrees Committee, acting under Regulation 2D, sections 6 (Doctoral Progression), 8 (Satisfactory work during each academic year) and 11 (Award)

Appeals in respect of (i) above may be made only on those grounds listed in 4 below. Appeals in respect of (ii) above may be made only on those grounds listed in 5 and 6 below.

2. Appeals against the academic judgement of examiners and/or of properly constituted Boards of Examiners (including for this purpose the Research Degrees Committee) are not permitted.

All programmes of study apart from research degrees

3. A student may appeal against the following recommendations of a Board of Examiners:

(i) the mark awarded for any unit of assessment;

(ii) the overall outcome of a programme of study;

(iii) failure at any stage of the programme of study;

(iv) the decision of the Board of Examiners consequent upon failure.

4. Appeals may be made only on one or both of the following grounds:

(i) procedural irregularity in the conduct of the assessment;

(ii) extenuating circumstances, providing that these circumstances were not known by the Board of Examiners at the time it made its decision, that these circumstances can be substantiated, and that there is a valid reason for not notifying the Board of Examiners in advance in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation 8.

Research Degrees

5. For research degree students appealing against decisions made under Regulation 2D, section 6 (Doctoral Progression), or section 8 (Satisfactory work during each academic year), appeals may be made on one or more of the following grounds:

(i) procedural irregularities;

(ii) extenuating circumstances, providing that these circumstances were not known by the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee at the time it made its decision, that these circumstances can be substantiated, and that there is a valid reason for not notifying the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee in advance in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation 8

(ii) inadequacy of supervision or facilities

6. For research degree students appealing against decisions made under Regulation 2D section11 (Award), appeals may be made on one or more of the following grounds:

(i) procedural irregularities;

(ii) extenuating circumstances, providing that these circumstances were not known by the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee at the time it made its decision, that these circumstances can be substantiated, and that there is a valid reason for not notifying the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee in advance in accordance with the relevant provisions of Regulation 8

Alleged inadequacy of supervisory or other arrangements during the period of study must be raised at the time, in accordance with procedures set out in the Code of Practice on Postgraduate Research Degrees, and do not constitute grounds for appeal following the submission of the thesis (appeals against decisions made under Regulation 2D section 11).

7. A student who wishes to appeal must:

(i) inform the Student Conduct Manager of the intention to appeal before Senate confirms the decision of the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee. The Student Conduct Manager will ask Senate not to confirm the Board/Committee's recommendation pending the outcome of the appeal; and

(ii) submit the full details of the appeal on the approved Appeal Form to the Secretary to the Appeals Committee no later than 10 days from the official notification of the decision of either the Board of Examiners, or the Research Degrees Committee In completing the form students must set out their case, provide supporting evidenc,e and include a statement of the remedial action which they would like the University to consider in the event of a sucessful appeal.

Prima Facie stage for appeal

8. Appeal cases will be considered in the first instance by the Chair and a member of the Academic Appeals Committee, nominated on a rotating basis by the Chair of the Committee. Where the Chair and the member of the Committee concerned confirms that there is a prima facie case for the appeal to be heard, the appeal shall be submitted to the Academic Appeals Committee, the dates of whose meetings shall be published at the start of each academic year. However if the case is straight forward and the evidence is deemed to be sufficiently compelling, the Chair and the member of the Committee may at their discretion refer the case back to the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee. Where the Chair and the member of the Committee concerned are of the view that no prima facie case exists the Secretary will so advise the student in writing, stating the reasons. In such circumstances it will be open to the student to follow the provisions of 22 below.

9. Where in the case of an appeal against withdrawal, the Chair and the member of the Committee concerned are of the view that no prima facie case exists, they may, nevertheless and at their discretion, propose a means within the provisions of the academic regulations by which the student may, under whatever conditions the Student Conduct Manager deems appropriate, remain a registered student of the University.

Constitution of the Academic Appeals Committee

10. The Academic Appeals Committee shall be constituted as follows:

  • Two nominees of the Vice-Chancellor (one in the Chair and the other to act as Deputy Chair, each to be a member of a different faculty)
  • A senior academic member of each faculty, nominated by the Dean of the Faculty, or in the case of research degree appeals, three Research Institute Directors (or nominees thereof), none of whom must be from the Institute where the student has been registered.

The Committee shall be serviced by the Directorate of Planning and Academic Administration.

Where an appeal is submitted by a student who has been taught, assessed or advised by a member of the Committee, or who is registered for a course in a member’s School/Institute for which that member has a management responsibility, or where a member has a declared interest, that member shall take no part in consideration of the case other than to provide general information at the request of the Chair on the subject and/or professional context but without reference to the particular case under consideration

For a meeting of the Committee to be quorate, three of the five members must be present, one of whom must be the Chair or Deputy Chair.

Function and powers of thre Academic Appeals Committee

11. The functions of the Academic Appeals Committee shall be:

(i) to consider academic appeals by students;

(ii) to act on behalf of the Vice-Chancellor and the Senate in implementing decisions to uphold appeals;

(iii) to consider and investigate claims of procedural irregularities in the conduct of assessments and, where appropriate, to make recommendations to the Vice-Chancellor.

(iv) to provide an annual report to Senate on the appeals received. Where the Committee has serious cause for concern arising from an appeal a report should be made immediately to the Head of Governance and Quality Assurance.

12. Save as provided for under 14, the Academic Appeals Committee shall have no power to overrule the academic judgement of examiners with respect to assessment marks, progression or awards but is empowered to refer a case back to the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee for reconsideration in the light of the evidence and the Committee's findings. In such circumstances, the Board of Examiners/Research Degrees Committee shall consider the case ab initio.

13. Where the appeal is against a recommendation for withdrawal, or derives from a proven procedural irregularity in the conduct of the assessment, the Committee shall be empowered to allow progression, but only within the University's published progression criteria, allow a new assessment, a course transfer or a revised mark.

14. Where the appeal is against the award decision made by the Research Degrees Committee, and the Academic Appeals Committee determines that the thesis should be subject to re-examination the following procedures shall normally be followed:

(i) new examiners shall be appointed, in number not fewer than the original number and containing not fewer than the original number and containing not fewer than two external examiners;

(ii) the examiners shall be advised that they are conducting a re-examination on appeal but no information will be made available about the previous examination;

(iii) the examiners shall submit independant reports on the thesis before they examine the student orally, and a joint report after any oral examination;

(iv) the reports by the original examiners and by the new examiners shall be considered by the Research Degrees Committee before a final decision is reached.

Meetings of the Academic Appeals Committee

15. A student and/or his/her representative, who should be a Member of the University as defined by Statute 2, shall have the right, but is under no obligation, to give evidence in person to the meeting of the Academic Appeals Committee at which the case is being considered. A representative of the academic School(s)/Research Institute concerned is normally required to attend the meeting. The student may also invite any other person to write to the Committee on his/her behalf. It is the student's responsibility to ensure that any such information is submitted to the Secretary in good time. In relation to this regulation, "good time" is normally deemed to be seven working days prior to the date of the hearing.

16. The Secretary to the Academic Appeals Committee shall seek academic reports from the relevant School(s)/Research Institute or any other body relevant to the student's appeal, including the Chair of the Research Degrees Committee. These reports, together with the student's academic results and any relevant Exam Board minutes, will be put forward to the Academic Appeals Committee for consideration.

17. In respect of appeals on the grounds of procedural irregularity, the relevant Head(s) of School/Director of Research Institute/Chair of Research Degrees Committee shall be required to prepare a response to the allegations on behalf of the examiners.

18. All appeals must be anonymised at the time of submission of the documentation to the Academic Appeals Committee, save for identifying the name of the appellant.

19. The outcome of an appeal shall be notified to the student in writing and the relevant Head(s) of School/Director of Research Institute no more than 7 working days after the meeting of the Academic Appeals Committee. Reasons for the decision shall be given.

20. The decision of the Academic Appeals Committee shall be final, although the Academic Appeals Committee may reconsider an appeal in the light of new evidence, providing that it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Head of Governance and Quality Assurance that there was good reason for not bringing forward the evidence in the original appeal. Ignorance of the requirement to bring forward evidence shall not normally be deemed to be a good reason.

Grievances against appeal decisions

21. Following exhaustion of the appeals procedure, a student may submit a grievance to the University Council under the terms provided for by Statute 21 (23). Grievances must be submitted within 28 days of the letter informing the student of the outcome of the appeal and must be made in writing to the Secretary to Council. Grievances can only be made on one or both of the following grounds:

a) procedural irregularity in the conduct of the case;

b) there is new evidence that can be substantiated, including extenuating circumstances, which was not known at the time, and may have affected the outcome had it been known to the Committee and that there is a valid reason for not making it known at the time.

Expense Claims

22. The University will reimburse a student whose appeal is upheld only those expenses that are deemed by the Head of Governance and Quality Assurance to be essential to, and exclusively for, the conduct of the appeal which shall include the charge for medical certification and similar evidence in support of an appeal and appropriate travel costs within the UK in respect of the option set out in 16 above but shall exclude the costs of any legal consultation that a student may choose to undertake. Students are required to submit claims in writing to the Head of Governance and Quality Assurance and must enclose all relevant receipts.

Top of Page