LEARNING AND TEACHING COMMITTEE

Subject: Proposed Amendments to Regulation XIV

Origin: Academic Registrar

In the summer, the University received a decision from the Office of the Independent Adjudicator relating to a student complaint about the outcome of a Regulation XIV appeal. The complaint was found to be justified by the OIA, not in relation to the case made by the student, but in relation to the University’s failure to follow its own procedures in the handling of the complaint.

The issue concerned the interpretation of Regulation XIV which governs academic appeals and specifically who decides whether a student has established “good cause” for the circumstances not to have been brought to the University’s attention through the impaired performance procedure prior to the decision of the Board which is the subject of the appeal (paragraph 1, Regulation XIV). The Registry had always interpreted the Regulation as allowing the Academic Registrar (or nominee) to refer the appeal for further investigation (i.e. comments from the Department, paragraph 6 of the current Regulation) where it appeared that this might shed further light on the “good cause” issue. Deans had then taken account both of the validity of the grounds for appeal and made a judgement on “good cause” in view of the additional information available through the investigation.

The OIA decided to interpret the Regulation more strictly and concluded that only the Academic Registrar (or nominee) had the power to make a decision on the issue of “good cause”. In the case concerned, the Academic Registrar had given the student the benefit of the doubt and referred the matter for further investigation. However, the appeal had ultimately been rejected by the Dean, largely on the grounds of failure to establish “good cause”. The OIA directed that the case be reconsidered by another Dean solely on the basis of whether the grounds for appeal were sufficient in line with the provisions of the Regulation. The second Dean also rejected the appeal, explicitly on the grounds of inadequate evidence in support of the student’s specific case for impairment. Therefore, although the complaint was found to be justified after a lengthy process, there was no benefit to the student.

Appeals handled over the summer of 2006 have used the OIA interpretation of Regulation XIV and “good cause” has been considered only by the Academic Registrar. It is not felt that any miscarriages of justice have occurred this year. However, previous cases have arisen, including the one on which the OIA deliberated, where the matter of “good cause” was not clearly established by the student, but it was felt that the case merited further investigation before a decision was reached to ensure fairness to the student. It is therefore proposed that Regulation XIV be amended, as set out in the attached paper, to give the Academic Registrar greater flexibility to refer appeals for further investigation and to permit the Dean explicitly to make a final decision on the matter of “good cause”. The opportunity has also been taken to clarify the Academic Registrar’s powers to dismiss appeals with insufficient supporting evidence.

Author – Jennifer Nutkins

Date – 2 November 2006