The
faculty has introduced procedures to consider academic and administrative
problems and grievances at departmental or faculty level that students may
encounter. These include enrolment matters, assessment, unsatisfactory
progress, or the reasonable provision of faculty teaching and support
facilities. These procedures exclude disciplinary or sexual harassment matters,
which are covered by other special university procedures.
A grievance case would be considered closed upon receipt by the Chair of the
Committee of Undergraduate Studies or the Committee of Graduate Studies of a
written withdrawal of the grievance by the complainant, or of a written
agreement between the parties.
Academic
grievances are those where students have complaints about aspects of their
courses, assessment or other matters which are the responsibility of academic
staff and of departments, and centres in the faculty.
Because there are two main types of assignment and assessment in the faculty,
academic assessment appeals fall into two separate categories. The grounds on
which appeals can be made and the methods for making such appeals are outlined
as follows.
Students should be aware that grounds for any appeal are normally based only on matters of process, not quality of work. The Committee of Undergraduate Studies or the Committee of Graduate Studies will not arbitrate on the quality of the work per se.
The procedure for assessment of folios has a form of double-marking inherently built into it. Normally folios are not assessed by one person in the faculty but by a panel of staff members. An appeal against a grade will only be considered on technical discrepancies, such as:
In establishing the case, the student is required to collect
particular evidence to indicate a failure to follow appropriate process.
The discrepancy between messages of encouragement from academic staff during
the semester and a fail result at the end of the semester does not constitute
grounds for appeal against a grade. The student should be aware that any appeal
is normally based on process as outlined above and not on quality of work. The
Committee for Undergraduate Studies or the Committee for Graduate Studies will
not arbitrate on the quality of the work per se.
The re-marking of performances, installations and oral presentations are difficult because they are often impossible to reconstruct. These categories may arise in both the studio area and the theory area. Provision by students should always be made for reassessment on the basis of a written or taped or video recording of the work. Students are advised that they should take care to create and retain a hard copy of their work in these ephemeral genres. In the case of a class paper, comprehensive notes may be used for re-assessment.
The
procedures are designed to provide speedy and efficient resolution of problems
and complaints through appropriate departmental and faculty mechanisms, while
protecting the rights of students and staff. They provide for cases which
cannot be resolved satisfactorily through normal negotiations. All cases will
be treated as confidential.
1 Initially, students should discuss the matter with the lecturer
concerned. If satisfactory resolution does not eventuate, the student should
consult the course coordinator (where the course coordinator is not the
lecturer). If the matter remains unresolved, the student should present his/her
case in writing to the responsible head of department, or centre. (Where the
lecturer is the head of the department or centre, another senior member of that
department or centre should deal with the case.) Normally no more than fourteen
days should elapse from the date of the initial complaint and the completion of
all stages of referral and attempted resolution within the relevant department
or centre.
2 If the matter remains unresolved after the fourteen-day period, the
matter may be referred to the chairperson of the Committee for Undergraduate
Studies (CUGS) or of the Committee for Graduate Studies (COGS) by either the
student or the head of the department, or the centre. Normally, the referral
will be made by the head of the department or centre who shall notify the
student in writing at the time that this step has been taken. Either party may
submit further information to the chairperson of CUGS or COGS, who will attempt
to conciliate and resolve the dispute within fourteen days of receiving the
referral.
3 If conciliation fails, it may be referred to an ad hoc student
grievance committee of CUGS or COGS for arbitration. Material from either party
to the dispute shall be made available to all parties involved, prior to the
appeal hearing. Members of the Faculty Grievance Committee cannot be from a
department from which the dispute has arisen. The committee shall normally make
its determination within fourteen days and provide written notification of its
decision to the student and the head of the department or centre.
Decisions of the Faculty Grievance Committee may be appealed in writing to the
dean of the faculty.
Administrative
grievances are those where students have complaints about matters relating to
enrolment or to information, advice or services on other matters provided by
administrative staff of the faculty.
1 Students who have a grievance in relation to administrative
matters concerning the faculty office or officers should in the first instance
discuss the matter with the faculty registrar who will attempt to resolve the
matter.
2 If this is not successful, students have a right to request, in
writing, that the matter be reviewed by the dean of the faculty. A
recommendation for the resolution of the matter should normally be made within
fourteen days of the submission being received.
3 If the dean of the faculty is unable to resolve the matter it
will be considered by the faculty Student Grievance Committee. The committee
shall finally determine the matter normally within fourteen days.