|
Policy for Grade Appeal
The procedure outlined below applies to a
situation where a student initiates a grade appeal request.
Only the faculty member who assigned the
original grade has the authority to change that grade unless the
grade is appealed and the appeal is successful. In the event
the faculty member is no longer with the university, the
authority to change the grade, including the authority to make
up an incomplete, is delegated to the department chair or dean.
(Faculty Handbook – Section 5.3.9) The Grade Appeal Policy
below is based upon this section of the NAU Faculty Handbook.
A grade assigned by an instructor may be
appealed only by following the procedures defined below. In
every case, the burden of proof rests upon the student to show
reason why the grade should be changed. A grade change should
be granted only in instances where the instructor deviated
substantially from the accepted and specified standards of
proficiency of the University and/or academic department as
established by the Faculty Handbook and/or College/Department
Academic Policy Manual. Generally such deviations are evidenced
by a departure from the course syllabus, alleged preferential
treatment of another student, or classroom policies applied
unevenly across students enrolled in the class. In all
instances, the instructor(s) involved must be given full
opportunity to present his/her position before an action is
taken.
The student must initiate the appeal
process within the next regular term following the term in which
the course work was completed. For example, appeal of a course
grade received for a fall or winter intersession term must be
initiated during the following spring term; a spring or summer
term grade must be initiated during the following fall term.
Group grade appeals are not permitted
unless approved by the Provost or designee.
Definitions:
“Meeting” is defined by the presence of all
parties to the grade appeal either physically in one location or
via electronic means.
“Designated Administrator” refers to the
individual in charge of carrying out the specific step of the
process. Generally this will be an assistant/associate dean,
department chair or director. Terminology varies among the
academic units.
“Appellant” is the individual bringing the
appeal to the College-level Committee or the ASC Sub-committee.
In most cases this will be the student, but it could be a
faculty member if the grade had been changed in Step 3 by the
Designated Administrator or in step 4 by the College Committee.
“Respondent” is the individual who assigned
the grade being challenged. If the appellant is a student, the
respondent is the faculty member who assigned the grade or the
Designated Administrator if the faculty member is no longer an
employee of NAU. If the appellant is a faculty member, the
respondent is the designated administrator who changed the grade
in Step 3 or the Chair of the College Committee from Step 3.
“Statement of Issues” is a written record
of the specific reasons the grade is being appealed if the
appellant is a student. If the appellant at the College-level
Committee hearing is a faculty member, the “Statement of Issues”
is a document which refutes the reasons given by the Designated
Administrator for changing the grade in Step 3.
“Formal Meeting” is defined as the meeting
which results from the written communication to the instructor
requesting a meeting to discuss the assigned grade. (See Step1
below)
“Informal Meeting” is a meeting between a
student and instructor where the student’s stated purpose is to
ascertain the reasons for the assignment of his/her grade in the
course. An “informal meeting” is not considered sufficient to
initiate the grade appeal process.
Procedures for the Grade Appeal
Step 1
A written communication by the student to the instructor
indicating a desire to review the grade is considered initiation
of the appeal process. This written communication may be in the
form of an email or a letter.
Step 2:
Following receipt of the written communication from the
student, a student-instructor meeting must be held. The meeting
may be in person or via the telephone, and must be conducted or
scheduled within two weeks of the receipt of the written
communication. The student may bring a silent observer to this
meeting provided the instructor is notified no less than two
working days prior to the meeting. If the initial
student-instructor meeting does not produce satisfaction, the
student has two weeks to notify, in writing, the designated
administrator of the academic unit of the intent to proceed to
Step 3.
If the faculty member who taught the course
is no longer employed at NAU, the appeal is filed with the
academic unit administrator. Upon receiving a written request
from the student, the academic unit administrator will schedule
a meeting with the student. The student must present to the
academic unit administrator a written “Statement of Issues” at
least one week prior to the meeting. The student may bring a
silent observer to this meeting provided the designated
administrator is notified no less than two working days prior to
the meeting. If this meeting does not resolve the
complaint, the student has two weeks to notify the Dean of the
college of the intent to proceed to Step 4. This request must
be in writing and must be accompanied by a “Statement of
Issues.”
If the faculty member who taught the course
is on sabbatical/leave or other kind of assignment, he/she has
the option of participating or not participating in the grade
appeal process. If the faculty member chooses to participate in
the process, paragraph one of Step 2 is followed. If the
faculty member chooses not to participate in the process,
paragraph two of Step 2 is followed.
Step 3:
Upon receiving a written request from the student, the
designated administrator will call a meeting of the student,
instructor, and him/herself. This meeting may be
conducted via telephone or ITV. The student must present to the
designated administrator a “Statement of Issues” at least one
week prior to the meeting. This statement must be shared with
the instructor at least three working days prior to the above
mentioned meeting. The student may bring a silent observer to
the meeting provided the designated administrator is notified no
less than two working days prior to the meeting.
The faculty member must be present during the proceedings in
Step 3 unless the faculty member is no longer employed at NAU,
is on sabbatical/leave or other kind of assignment and chooses
not to participate in the process.
Following the meeting, a letter, with
receipt confirmation, shall be sent to the student and the
faculty member documenting the meeting and confirming the
decision that was made. This letter constitutes the official
minutes of the meeting and shall include a copy of the student’s
“Statement of Issues.” The designated administrator may affirm
or change the grade based upon the evidence presented.
If the instructor of the course is a
department chair or the administrator of the academic unit, Step
3 of the process is conducted by a Dean-designated administrator
within the College.
If this meeting does not resolve the
appeal, the student or instructor has 10 working days following
receipt of the letter to notify the Dean of the college of the
intent to proceed to Step 4. This request must be in writing
and must be accompanied by a “Statement of Issues.”
Step 4:
Upon receiving a request from the appellant, the college
Dean or designee will appoint and convene an ad hoc committee
composed of the persons listed below to hear the appeal. The
appellant and/or the respondent may present additional written
statements supporting his/her position up to one week prior to
the Committee meeting. Requests for information by either the
student or faculty member must be made to the Committee chair at
least 15 working days prior to the meeting. If the Committee
chair considers a request to be a potential violation of
confidentiality, he/she should contact the Associate Provost for
Academic Administration (APAA) for final resolution of the
request. No material may be presented less than five working
days prior to the meeting of the ad hoc committee. No new
material may be presented at the Committee meeting. Material
requests by the Committee Chair to the appellant and/or
respondent must be honored within 10 working days.
All materials submitted by the appellant
and respondent must be given to the individual designated as the
Chair of the ad hoc committee. Committee members, appellant and
respondent must receive all materials no later than two working
days prior to the meeting.
Step 4 of the grade appeal process will be
conducted only during the fall and spring academic terms.
The minutes of the
Student/Faculty/Designated Administrator meeting will be
forwarded to the Chair of the ad hoc committee. During the
Committee meeting, the appellant and respondent will be given
full opportunity to present their positions.
The Dean's ad
hoc committee shall consist of:
a. Dean of the college, or designee, who chairs the
committee. This individual must be different from the
individuals who served as the designated administrators in steps
2 and 3;
b. Two faculty members from the department in which the course
being appealed is offered. If two faculty members from the
department cannot be found, faculty from other academic units in
the college/school may be appointed;
c. Two faculty members from an academic unit outside the
department in which the course being appealed is offered. These
faculty members may come from the same college/school as the
department in which the course is being appealed or they may
come from a different college/school;
d. The ASNAU senator, or designee, who is the representative
of that college/school. If this individual is not available,
the Chair of this Committee may appoint another student to
fulfill this role.
e. A
representative of the Office of the Provost, in an advisory
capacity;
Process to be followed by the ad hoc
Committee:
It is required that all parties to the
grade appeal be present in person or via electronic means during
the fact finding phase of the meeting. The appellant may bring
a silent observer to this Committee hearing provided the
chair of the committee is notified no less than two working days
prior to the meeting.
Format for College-level Grade Appeal
Hearing:
Introduction of Committee members
Charge to Committee by Chair
Process Statement by Provost Office Representative
Presentation of Information by Appellant
Presentation of Information by Respondent
Questions from Committee Members
Response to Respondent presentation by Appellant
Response to Appellant presentation by Respondent
Questions from Committee Members
Meeting Ending Statement by Chair
Deliberations and Vote
The fact finding phase of the meeting
should generally last between 30 and 45 minutes.
The chair shall vote only in the event of a
tie. Minutes of the meeting shall be taken by someone other than
the person chairing the meeting and shall be prepared in summary
form. These minutes are kept in the office of the Dean; a copy
is forwarded to the representative from the Provost’s Office.
The appellant and respondent will be sent copies of the minutes
and may propose corrections to the minutes before they are
released to any party outside of the Committee.
It is recommended that the fact-finding
portion of the meeting in which the appellant and respondent
present their information be taped. No taping of the
Committee’s deliberations is allowed. The tape will be
retained in the Office of the Dean and disposed of according to
Arizona Statutes on Records Retention. Any member of the
committee or party present at the committee meeting (defined as
a participant) is authorized to have access to the tape. Any
requests from non-participants in the meeting will be referred
to university legal counsel for resolution. A letter will be
sent to the appellant and respondent indicating the decision of
the committee, and the rationale behind this decision.
Step 5:
Should either the student or the instructor not be satisfied
with the decision of the College ad-hoc committee,
the matter may be appealed in writing to the Office of the
Provost. The only grounds for appeal to the Provost’s Office
are violations of due process at any stage of the grade appeal.
The appeal request will be forwarded via
the Associate Provost for Academic Administration
to the Chair of the Academic Standards Committee (ASC) who shall
be responsible for calling a meeting of a subcommittee of the
ASC composed of at least six individuals. Both the appellant
and respondent must be notified in writing of the hearing at
this level and the procedures to be followed.
At a meeting specifically scheduled to
consider only the grade appeal, the ASC sub-committee will
conduct a review of the process of the appeal at all levels
based on the particular circumstances of the case, the rules of
the University, the rulings of the Arizona Board of Regents, and
the laws of the State of Arizona. The review shall be focused
solely on the process carried out by the various individuals
involved in the various stages of the grade appeal. The ASC
sub-committee may invite the appellant and other relevant
individuals to the hearing if it decides the individual’s
presence is required to provide the information necessary for
the sub-committee to make an informed decision.
Format for ASC Sub-committee Grade Appeal Hearing when no outside parties are present
Charge to Committee by Chair of
Sub-committee
Review of Appeal Statement by Appellant
Review of College Committee Minutes
Committee Discussion, Deliberations and Vote
Format for ASC Sub-committee Grade Appeal Hearing When One or more Invited Individuals are Present
Charge to Committee by Chair of
Sub-committee
Review of Appeal Statement by Appellant
Review of College Committee Minutes
Presentation of Information by Appellant
Presentation of Information by Respondent
Questions from Committee Members
Response to Respondent presentation by Appellant
Response to Appellant presentation by Respondent
Questions from Committee Members
Committee Discussion, Deliberations and Vote
The decision reached by the ASC
Sub-committee will be communicated to the Appellant, the
Respondent and the Dean of the College .
The decisions reached by the ASC
Sub-committee shall become a matter of University record in the
Office of the Provost. This decision shall be final and end any
further campus involvement. There is no appeal beyond this
level.
Approved:
Academic Standards Committee – March 4, 2005
Dr. Liz Grobsmith, Provost – March 9, 2005 |
