1.1 An academic appeal is a request from a Common Awards student for formal review of an academic decision affecting that student.1
1.2 This procedure is designed to align with the core principles outlined in the OIA’s Good Practice Framework: Delivering learning opportunities with others.
Back to top
1 These procedures do not apply to:
Appeals against results obtained at another Institution that count towards a University of Durham degree. [Appeals about the translation or conversion of the other Institution’s marks or grades into University of Durham terms should be made through the University of Durham appeals systems (e.g. Study Abroad ).]
(i) Any student appellant wishing to appeal against the grades awarded by the other institution shall pursue this through the appeals procedure of that Institution.
(ii) Any such appeals must have been made to the other institution. The Chair of the Board of Examiners for the programme on which the student is registered should be informed in writing by 31 October in the final year of study (or such earlier time as may be specified in the procedures of the other Institution) that such an appeal has been initiated.
(iii) The other Institution shall retain the examination papers and notes of oral examinations of Durham students until three months after the date on which they are expected to graduate in Durham.
2.1 An academic appeal investigation has a limited scope. Effectively the investigation amounts to a check as to whether the decision appealed was reached:
(a) in accordance with correct Durham University procedures; and
(b) in the light of relevant information.
2.2 Matters of academic judgement cannot be appealed. Durham University defines “academic judgement” as the professional and scholarly knowledge and expertise which members of Durham University staff and the external examiners draw upon in reaching an academic decision.
2.3 Academic judgement therefore includes, but is not restricted to, decisions about the severity of impact of mitigating circumstances on academic performance, decisions about the academic standard attained by students, marks and grades to be awarded for individual pieces of work or modules, and degrees and degree classifications to be awarded, or not.
2.4 In view of its limited scope, there are two primary circumstances in which an academic appeal may be appropriate:
(a) that there might have been a serious error in the way in which the original decision was made;
(b) that there exists, or existed, circumstances affecting the student’s performance of which, for good reason, the Board of Examiners or Committee or Durham University Officer might not have been aware when the original decision was made.
2.5 It cannot be used for any of the following type of appeal:
3.1 If the appeal is upheld it will normally be sent back for reconsideration by the body that made the original decision. This does not necessarily mean that the original decision will be reversed or altered. Normally marks for work will only be changed if there was an error in recording or processing them.
4.1 The Common Awards and Durham University’s Academic Appeal Regulations are based on the following principles:
(a) that staff and students are expected to act fairly and reasonably;
(b) that, where a complaint is shown to be frivolous, vexatious or motivated by malice, it will not be investigated and disciplinary action may be taken;
(c) that staff must not investigate cases in which any potential conflict of interest might arise. Where practicable, senior staff should avoid becoming involved in the early stages of an academic appeal because it may compromise their ability to be involved at a later stage;
(d) that students must abide by University General Regulations and Student Codes of Practice published and available on the University’s website;
(e) that Durham University will treat academic appeals seriously and will deal with them without disadvantage or recrimination unless misconduct by the student is uncovered in the course of investigating the academic appeal;
(f) that staff and students will be expected to comply with deadlines. Time limits for appeals will be extended only in exceptional circumstances, such as when the student did not receive timely notification of the decision for reasons outside his or her control;
(g) that, before submitting a formal appeal, students should attempt to resolve the matter informally with their institution where feasible. Where the student is dissatisfied with the outcome of the informal approach, they should submit a formal appeal, using the relevant academic appeal proforma. Formal academic appeals are not investigated by the student’s Theological Education Institute (TEI). They are submitted directly to the University. Students should inform their institution that they are submitting an academic appeal. The relevant forms and information about sources of support are available from the Common Awards team;
(h) that Common Awards TEIs and Durham University expect students (as the person best able to communicate any issues of dissatisfaction or adverse effects) to raise academic appeals with Durham University and will only accept academic appeals raised by third parties on a student’s behalf in exceptional cases, and where the submission is accompanied by a signed letter of authority or equivalent from the student giving their express permission to raise an appeal on their behalf. In any meeting with Durham University staff under this policy, students have the right to be accompanied by a current member of the University or Common Awards TEI community, or a Students’ Union representative;
(i) that complete confidentiality cannot be always guaranteed if effective action is to be taken on an academic appeal. Therefore, students are asked to sign a disclaimer on the University’s appeal proformas authorising the investigating authority to consult others and share information on a need to know basis. Staff dealing with appeals must, however, ensure that information disclosed by the student appealing is only disclosed to third parties on a need to know basis. Normally no information is disclosed to anyone outside the University, including the student’s parents, without the express permission of the student;
(j) that students seeking help in using this procedure should seek advice from any of the following on a confidential basis:
Where complete confidentiality is requested by a student, this might limit the extent to which an academic appeal can be investigated. Authoritative advice on the appeals regulations or complaints procedure is contained in the regulations. The Durham Academic Quality Service team may be contacted for advice on the appeals process. To ensure that an independent investigation is undertaken, the Officer investigating the appeal or complaint should not be asked for advice in advance of the notification of the decision;
(k) that, where an academic appeal is upheld, the remedy will be implemented within a reasonable timescale;
(l) that in addition to the Academic Appeals regulations Durham University has established a Student Complaints process for student complaints relating to the academic provision at the Common Awards TEI at which they are registered;
(m) that in cases where a student raises matters informally or formally which may apply to the academic appeal procedure and another procedure simultaneously, Durham University will write to the student to inform them of the appropriate process, processes or order of processes which will be used for consideration of the matters they raised. Students are not permitted to initiate more than one formal procedure simultaneously for the same or related matters;
(n) that Academic Appeals are monitored by the University annually because they provide important evidence about how effectively the University’s student procedures have operated in practice. The University Senate therefore receives an annual report containing an anonymised analysis of formal complaints and appeals including a breakdown by gender, age, ethnicity and disability based on information supplied at registration. Where appropriate the report will contain recommendations for improving practice in the University.
5.1 Students may use these regulations to appeal against the following decisions:
(a) a confirmed decision of a Board of Examiners or the Examiners of a higher degree.
(b) a decision of a University Committee or a University officer on any academic matter affecting the student appealing (eg a decision regarding Academic Progress).
6.1 The grounds for appeal are limited to:
(a) that the student was adversely affected by illness or other relevant factors, of which they were previously unaware or which for a good cause they were unable to disclose to the Examiners or other decision-making body or Officer
AND/OR
(b) that the student has evidence that parts of the relevant documented procedure were not applied correctly or their marks were not calculated correctly and this procedural defect was significant enough to have materially affected the decision, making it unsound
(c) that the Board of Examiners or other decision-making body or Officer took a decision which was not reasonable in all the circumstances.
7.1 A student must appeal within 21 days of the date of the notification of the decision to be appealed2, by completing a Common Awards Appeals Proforma, which should be sent to the University Common Awards Team (common.awards@durham.ac.uk).
7.2 The student must state the grounds for appeal, giving detailed reasons to support his or her case.
7.3 Within 42 days of the Common Awards Appeals pro forma being received, the Chair of the Common Awards Management Board or the Deputy Chair or another member of University staff designated by the Chair shall be responsible for considering the appeal.
7.4 Where he or she considers it appropriate, the member of University staff considering the appeal may treat an appeal as if it were an application for a concession.
7.5 Where he or she considers the appeal to be clearly against an academic judgement alone, the member of University staff considering the appeal may deem the appeal as misconceived and refuse to investigate dismiss the appeal further.
7.6 Where an appeal is accepted, the member of University staff considering the appeal will:
7.6.1 consult the following and receive written information from those consulted:
7.6.2 consult other members of the Common Awards TEI and/or Durham University staff if he or she deems it appropriate in particular cases;
7.6.3 produce a brief report on the case setting out his/her decision on the case;
7.6.4 notify the outcome of the appeal to the student and the Common Awards team within the Academic Quality Service and provide the student with a copy of his/her Appeal file containing the documentation considered.
7.7 The Stage 1 Appeal will have one of the following outcomes:
7.7.1 if the member of University staff considering the appeal has concluded that the appeal is allowed, it shall either:
(a) be referred back to the original decision-making body for reconsideration.
Or
(b) be treated as an application for a concession, in which case the appeal process may be concluded without an appeal investigation taking place.
7.7.2 the member of University staff considering the appeal concludes that the appeal is dismissed as unjustified.
7.8 If the student is dissatisfied with the decision to dismiss the appeal, or the decision reached by the original body on reconsidering the case, or the concession offered, he or she may appeal to the Durham University Senate Academic Appeals Committee within 14 days of notification of the decision in question provided that they are able to evidence sufficient grounds for appeal as outlined in 8.2 below.
2 or 21 days from the date of dispatch from the University of documentation requested under the terms of the Data Protection Act. Any such Subject Access request must be made within 14 days of the date of notification of the decision to be appealed against. [The University will send the subject access documentation via a recorded delivery service.]
3 The ‘Designated Officer’ in this context is the staff member with responsibility for authorising the Academic Progress Notice (APN) at the TEI
8.1 An appeal to the Durham University Senate Academic Appeals Committee (SAAC) must be made within 14 days of the date of the notification of the Formal Appeal Stage 1 decision, using a Senate Appeal Proforma, also available on the University website or via the Academic Quality Service Team
8.2 The grounds for appeal are either:
(a) that the student (the appellant) has evidence that parts of the relevant documented procedure were not applied correctly at the Formal Appeal stage 1 and this procedural defect was significant enough to have materially affected the decision, making it unsound;
(b) that there is substantial and relevant new information that was previously unknown to the student , or which for a valid reason they were unable to disclose at the Formal Appeals stage 1 and that the information is significant enough to have materially affected the Formal Appeal stage 1 decision, making it unsound.
8.3 Upon receipt, appeal forms will be scrutinised by the Academic Quality Service and these may be refused and returned to the appellant if the form is incomplete; submitted outside of the specified timescales without good reason given; has been submitted by a third party with no authorisation from the appellant; no evidence has been provided to support the appeal or the appeal clearly does not meet one of the specified grounds in section 6. If the appeal is accepted, within 28 days of the University SAAC pro forma being received by the Secretary to Senate Academic Appeals Committee, it shall be
8.3.1 copied to the Common Awards Team at the University for information
8.3.2 considered by an Academic Appeal Review Panel (AARP) chaired by a SAAC Chair/Deputy Chair, in consultation with the Head or deputy to the Head of a Faculty other than the Arts and Humanities Faculty and in the light of the documentation considered at the Formal Appeal stage 1.
8.4 If the SAAC Chair/Deputy Chair is ineligible or unavailable to act in respect of an individual case, the Vice-Chancellor and Warden, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor/ Provost or a Pro-Vice-Chancellor shall designate a senior member of the University to serve as SAAC Chair/Deputy Chair for that particular case.
8.5 The SAAC Chair/Deputy Chair and the Head of Faculty or deputy to the Head of Faculty may consult as they deem appropriate.
8.6 The Academic Appeal Review Panel may:
8.6.1 Dismiss the appeal on the basis that the criteria for the grounds of the appeal are not met
8.6.2 Uphold the appeal and refer the case back to the appropriate party, for example the Board of Examiners
8.6.3 Exceptionally, refer the case to a full meeting of the SAAC
8.7 Where the case is upheld or dismissed by the AARP, the Secretary to the Senate Appeals Committee shall inform the student of the outcome of the Academic Appeal Review Panel in writing and enclose a copy of the student’s SAAC file and provide a completion of procedures letter. The student shall also be told that he/she may take the matter to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIAHE) in accordance with their procedures. This will normally take place within 10 working days.
8.8 A guideline for complaints to the OIAHE5will be issued with the University’s Completion of Procedure letters. Students have a maximum of 12 months to bring their complaint to the OIA.
8.9 If the OIAHE rules that the appeal should be considered by the SAAC, the Committee must meet in accordance with these procedures, chaired by a senior member of University staff, normally a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, who has not been previously consulted about or involved in the matter.
4 The University reserves the right to stay the academic appeals process pending completion of legal or other proceedings which may be relevant to the appeal.
5The Guideline is available on the web via www.oiahe.org.uk
9.1 A full meeting of the SAAC is normally held within 28 days of the decision by the AARP that the appeal be considered by the Committee, and the student shall receive at least two weeks' notice of the meeting.
9.2 With the exception of the Chair/Deputy Chair of the Committee, any member of the SAAC who has already been involved in the matter shall not sit on the Committee.
9.3 Where considered appropriate, the student may be invited to attend the meeting, and where this is the case they shall have the right to:
9.3.1 present his/her case in person, accompanied either by a member of staff of his/her choice (if willing) or by another registered Common Awards student of his/her choice (if willing) or by a member of staff from the Durham Students' Union (if willing);
9.3.2 nominate a proxy, who should be a member of the University or Common Awards TEI community, to attend and present the case on the student’s behalf (if willing), if the student is unable for a valid reason to attend in person. The meeting may proceed in the absence of the student or proxy provided that the Chair/Deputy Chair of the Committee considers it reasonable to do so.
9.4 The Committee shall have the power to call and seek evidence from whomsoever it judges appropriate.
9.5 Normally, those attending the Committee would include the Chair of the Common Awards Board of Examiners.
9.6 At the hearing, if present, the student or his or her proxy shall be the first to speak to the SAAC. Anyone who is present to accompany one of the participants in the appeal may speak to the Committee only with the permission of the Chair/Deputy Chair.
9.7 All members of the SAAC considering the appeal, the appellant, or his or her proxy and those having the right to attend, shall receive papers relevant to the case.
Note: The Committee shall not itself reach an independent academic judgement on the quality of academic work in any cases of appeal against decisions of examiners, but may request the appointment of fresh or additional examiners if a further opinion on the quality of a particular piece of work or works is deemed necessary.
9.8 Having considered the evidence and taken such advice as may be appropriate, the SAAC shall issue a written judgement, normally within 10 days.
9.9 If the SAAC decides to allow an appeal, it shall refer the matter back to an appropriate body within the University or the original decision-making body for further consideration and action.
9.10 The University will issue a Completion of Procedure letter notifying the student of SAAC’s and hence the University’s final decision on their case and of the right to complain to the OIAHE in accordance with their procedures.
9.11 The SAAC shall submit a report to Senate if an important point of principle is to be determined, or in individual cases as the SAAC judges appropriate.
/prod01/prodbucket01/media/durham-university/departments-/common-awards/images-and-logos/theology-images/37247.jpg)