91��Ƭ

An 'appeal' is a request for a review of a decision of a Board of Examiners that has been charged with decisions on student progression, assessment and awards.

For example, where valid grounds for appeal exist, you may appeal the following:

Please note that the academic appeals process cannot change an assessment result from a fail to a pass, nor can it increase the mark awarded for an assessment. The most common outcome for an appeal is for the student to be granted a further attempt at assessment.

Section four of the Academic Appeals Regulations details what can, and cannot, be used as grounds for appeal. Relevant extracts have been provided below.

2.1 Grounds of Additional Information

"4.1.1 additional information is available that was not, and could not, reasonably have been made available to the Board at the time it made its original decision and which had it been available could have led the Board to making a different decision (see also 4.3 below);

4.2 A student may NOT appeal on grounds which:

• could have been considered by the Board of Examiners had notice been given prior to the meeting; and
• the student has no valid reason for having failed to give such notice.

4.3 References in 4.1 and 4.2 to information available to the Board of Examiners include recommendations on student cases made by the Extenuating Circumstances Panel (EC Panel). Appeals on the grounds of extenuating circumstances will not be accepted where there is evidence that the circumstances that form the basis of the submission could have been submitted to the EC Panel by the published deadline, and the student has no grounds for not submitting by that deadline."

Key points:

This ground for appeal is open to students who have valid extenuating circumstances but, for one or more reasons, were unable to notify the Board of Examiners through the Extenuating Circumstances process.

Appeals submitted on this ground should therefore include an explanation as to why an extenuating circumstances claim was not made.

2.2 Grounds of Material Irregularity

"4.1.2 there was a material irregularity in the procedures of the Board of Examiners or in the conduct of the assessment."

A material irregularity in the conduct of assessment is where an issue has, or issues have, adversely affected your ability to complete your assessment. For example, an error made by a member of University staff, or disruption to an assessment caused by a third party.

A material irregularity in the procedures of the Board of Examiners is where the Board has taken a decision that is not consistent with the University’s regulations, or has taken a decision that was based on incorrect information.

Key points:

If you think there has been an error in the way your work was assessed, tell the relevant module coordinator as soon as possible, and ideally before the Board of Examiners meets. If an error is confirmed, it may be possible for staff to rectify or mitigate the error without going through the formal appeals process.

If you think there is a material irregularity in the procedures of the Board of Examiners, are you able to evidence that the Board of Examiners has taken a decision that was not consistent with the University’s regulations, or has taken a decision that was based on incorrect information?

2.3 Academic Judgement

"4.4 A student’s disagreement with the academic judgement of a Board of Examiners does not provide a valid ground for appeal."

The Office of the Independent Adjudicator, the independent student complaints scheme for England and Wales, defines academic judgement as follows:

“Academic judgment is not any judgment made by an academic; it is a judgment that is made about a matter where the opinion of an academic expert is essential. So for example a judgment about marks awarded, degree classification, research methodology, whether feedback is correct or adequate, and the content or outcomes of a course will normally involve academic judgment.”

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO), the final stage for complaints about public service organisations in Scotland, cannot investigate matters related to the exercise of academic judgement.

Key points:

You cannot submit an academic appeal because you believe you should have been awarded a better mark. Section five of the University’s Assessment Regulations sets out how the University seeks to ensure the fairness, reliability and validity of assessment.

If you are not sure why you received a particular outcome or mark, you should inform the module coordinator who may be able to provide additional feedback to help you understand the result. Alternatively, your Personal Academic Tutor may be approached for advice.

An appeal must be submitted within 21 days of the publication of the decision of the Board of Examiners, or receipt of the academic transcript. Where the University is closed the 21-day timeframe will be extended accordingly.

Publication of Board of Examiners’ decisions will usually take place on the Student Portal, with notification being sent by email to your 91��Ƭ and personal email accounts. For most students this will occur from 10 June 2024; with students requiring further assessment receiving additional Board of Examiners’ decisions from 21 August 2024.

For some programmes, publication of Board of Examiners’ decisions will occur throughout the academic year.

3.1 Early appeals

Please note that appeals received early i.e., before a decision has been agreed by a Board of Examiners, will not be heard as academic appeals.

In advance of the Board of Examiners, the Extenuating Circumstances process should be used to notify the University of any relevant additional information.

If you think there has been an error in the way your work was assessed, tell the relevant module coordinator as soon as possible, and ideally before the Board of Examiners meets. If an error is confirmed, it may be possible for staff to rectify or mitigate the error without going through the formal appeals process.

3.2 Late appeals

Please note that appeals received after the 21-day period has expired will not be heard as academic appeals, unless exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated.

Where a late appeal has been submitted with an explanation as to its lateness, this will be acknowledged as having been received, and the Dean of School or Deputy Principal will first consider whether exceptional circumstances exist that would permit the appeal to be heard. If exceptional circumstances are confirmed then the appeal will be heard. Where exceptional circumstances are not established, the appeal will not be heard.

Any student considering an appeal is encouraged to contact the .

Queries relating to the academic appeals process, and queries about the status of submitted appeals, should be sent to Appeals@qmu.ac.uk.

Step 1

Please read the Student Guide to Academic Appeals and review the Student Pre-Appeal Questionnaire.

Step 2

If required, contact the .

Step 3

Complete the Academic Appeals Form.

Step 4

Send the completed Academic Appeals Form, alongside any relevant supporting evidence, to Appeals@qmu.ac.uk.

Academic Appeals are considered on a case-by-case basis, and can be unsuccessful for one or more reasons. The following reasons are offered for illustrative purposes only.

• The appeal was submitted prematurely, i.e. before the Board of Examiners has taken the decision that is being appealed.
• The appeal was submitted late, i.e. outside of the timescale permitted for submission of academic appeals.
• The appeal has not been submitted under either of the permissible grounds for appeal as detailed within section four the Academic Appeals Regulations.
• The appeal relies solely on the questioning of academic judgement.
• The remedy sought is not available through the University’s regulations.
• An appeal is made on the grounds of additional information, but no valid reason is provided as to why such information could not have been presented at the relevant time through the Extenuating Circumstances process.
• An appeal is made on the grounds of additional information and no or insufficient evidence is provided to substantiate the circumstances; or the evidence is not sufficient to corroborate the impact on the student’s academic performance.
• An appeal is made on the grounds of material irregularity, but there is no or insufficient evidence that any error has taken place.

For Stage 1 Academic Appeals, the Dean of School will normally respond within 21 days of receipt of the appeal.

For Stage 2 Academic Appeals, the Academic Appeals Regulations do not specify a normal timescale. In practice, the Deputy Principal will normally respond within 28 days of receipt of the appeal.

Please note that the timescale for consideration of an academic appeal may be affected where the Dean of School or Deputy Principal is absent from the University through legitimate University business, leave or illness.

8.1 Stage 2

If you are dissatisfied with the outcome of your Stage 1 academic appeal, you may resubmit the appeal in the original or a revised form for consideration as a Stage 2 academic appeal.

Normally, Stage 2 academic appeals will only be upheld where there has been demonstrably an irregularity in the proceedings at Stage 1; or evidence has become available that it was not reasonable for you to provide at Stage 1.

A completed Academic Appeals form should be sent to Appeals@qmu.ac.uk within 21 days of receipt of the response from the Dean of School.

8.2 Scottish Public Service Ombudsman

If you are dissatisfied with the outcome of your Stage 2 academic appeal, you may seek review of your appeal by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO).

The SPSO may be able to investigate the manner in which the appeal was handled, but cannot consider matters of academic judgement.

Further information may be accessed through the website.