Policy on academic appeals

For the purposes of this policy an academic appeal, as defined by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA), is a "request for a review of a decision of an academic body charged with making decisions on student progress, assessment and awards."

There are four potential stages to the procedure.

1.   Cases subject to triage to assess eligibility for consideration under the academic appeals procedure.

2.   Case considered by academic appeal panel.

3.   Case considered at an academic appeal hearing.

4.   Academic appeal review.

After the internal University processes have been exhausted, appellants have the opportunity to have their case independently reviewed by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA).

Campus variations         

For more information about the academic appeals procedure on each campus, please consult the following:

• Academic Appeals Procedure: University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus  

Academic Appeals Procedure: UK (Nottingham)   

Academic Appeals Procedure: University of Nottingham Ningbo Campus   

The appeals procedure is available to students of the University of Nottingham, with the exception of students who have had their registration suspended by the University, other than at their own request under the voluntary interruption of studies procedure.

For more information about voluntary interruption of studies, please consult the following:

Voluntary interruption of studies

Students have the right to appeal to the Academic Appeals Committee against the following final decisions of an academic body charged with making decisions on assessment, progression and awards:

(a)   The conditions imposed and/or the requirement to take reassessments to progress to the next stage of a taught course or phase of research study.

(b)   A decision to terminate a student's current programme of study. This includes students whose programme of study is terminated but who are offered a transfer to another taught course or research degree.

(c)   A classification decision.¹ In addition to appeals against the class of honours degree awarded, this also includes appeals against the classification of postgraduate awards and of other undergraduate awards.

¹ A student who did not make the University aware of serious circumstances affecting their study before a progression Examination Board made its decision and who has met the progression requirements of the course, may appeal to be allowed further assessments in affected modules to mitigate a possible effect on their future degree classification. Such an appeal would be considered if submitted within one month of the marks confirming progression being published  and where the student demonstrates compelling reasons why they were unable to make the University aware of circumstances affecting their study prior to the Examination Board decision – for example, reasons associated with a disability, medically-evidenced incapacity to engage with support procedures.

(d)   A decision not to award the qualification for which a student is registered. This relates to decisions made at the end of a student's taught course or research degree; and includes appeals against decisions not to award any qualification or to award a lower qualification.

(e)   A decision of a University Fitness to Practise Committee or Practice Assessment Panel. This is relevant to students on professional courses who have been the subject of Fitness to Practise procedures. For more information, about Fitness to Practise procedures, please consult the following:

Fitness to practise procedures

(f)   The outcome of an Extenuating Circumstances claim. For more information about extenuating circumstance procedures, please consult the following:

Extenuating circumstances

5.1   It is for the student to establish the case and only claims of at least one of the following circumstances will be considered as grounds for appeal:

(i)   That parts of the documented assessment procedure were not applied and that this procedural irregularity, which has disadvantaged the student, was significant enough to have materially affected the decision or recommendation made, rendering it unsound.

(ii)   That prejudice or bias on the part of one or more of the examiners took place and can be proven or there are grounds to support a reasonable perception of prejudice or bias.

(iii)   That the decision making body took a decision which no reasonable person would find comprehensible. Disagreement with the decision does not make it manifestly unreasonable. To apply this ground the student must provide substantive argumentation as to why no reasonable person could have arrived at the decision that was made.

(iv)   The student’s performance was materially affected by circumstances and there is new evidence of these circumstances which was not, and could not have been, made available to the Board of Examiners at the time of its original decision.

5.2   The following circumstances will not be considered grounds for appeal:

(a)   Perceived shortcomings in tuition, supervision or support. Concerns relating to the quality of teaching or supervision, or other circumstances that relate to the delivery of a programme of study should be raised under the Policy on student complaints before the point of assessment or the submission of a thesis or dissertation. Cases where complaints are upheld and there has been a clear impact on an academic outcome may lead to an academic conclusion e.g. allowing a student a further attempt at an assessment.

For more information about the Policy on student complaints, please consult the following:

Policy on student complaints

(b)   Matters of academic judgement of a School Board of Examiners or individual. The student will not be permitted to argue the academic merits of their work. The student's assertion that the result unfairly reflects the merit of their work or their ability is not a ground of appeal.

(c)   Disagreement with the actual mark awarded for a piece of assessed work except where grounds can be established above. If a student wished to have clarification about a mark received for an individual assessment or module they are advised to contact their School or module convener directly. Errors in calculating or recording marks on the basis of which the original decision was made cannot be submitted as grounds for appeal, unless these errors have been brought to the School's attention but not accepted by the School.

(d)   Appeals against provisional marks.

(e)   Any matters relating to circumstances affecting study which could have been raised before the meeting of the Board of Examiners.

• The decisions made will be reasonable and, where required, provide appropriate redress.

• Appeals submitted outside the timescales prescribed in the procedure will only be considered in the most exceptional circumstances and where there is good reason, supported by evidence, for the late submission.
• Appeals will be treated seriously and students will not suffer any disadvantage or recrimination as the result of making an appeal in good faith.
• The University Policy on Communications with Third Parties is applicable to this policy. It is expected that students or people communicating on behalf of a student will conduct themselves responsibly and treat the process and those members of the University involved in the process with respect at all times. Where behaviour falls outside these expectations, the University’s Unacceptable Behaviour Policy will apply. For more information about the Policy on Communications with Third Parties, please consult the following:
• Policy on Communications with Third Parties  
• The University will not accept or investigate appeals which it considers to be in breach of the standards set out in the Unacceptable Behaviour Policy. For more information about the University's Unacceptable Behaviour Policy, please consult the following:
• Unacceptable Behaviour Policy  

• The procedures are fair and transparent.
• The Complaints and Conduct Manager has executive oversight of the process.
• The process is evidence-based.
• Students are encouraged to seek advice from an Education Adviser in Students' Union advice or equivalent office University of Nottingham Malaysia (UNM) and University of Nottingham Ningbo China (UNNC) at any stage in the process, including seeking advice on how to present their case effectively.
• Appeals form part of the University's process of quality review and improvement and are considered as providing valuable feedback rather than criticism. We will widely publicise information about procedures to students and staff, and all schools and central services are required to provide a link to them via their websites.
• Students will be notified early in the process if the remedy sought within the appeal is beyond what the University can reasonably provide or what is in its power to provide.
• It is important for students to note that the Office of the Independent Adjudicator cannot consider matters which are or which have been the subject of court proceedings. Similarly, the University reserves the right to decline, suspend or to discontinue an appeal made under the Academic Appeal Procedure, in the event that legal proceedings are commenced and the claim concerns the same subject matter as the appeal.

It is important that appeals are monitored in order to improve the student experience. The Complaints and Conduct Team will record and provide reports to indicate the nature of appeals and outcomes. Such reports will:

• Feed into the monitoring and evaluation procedure at various levels: department, school, faculty and University;
• Feed directly into appropriate University-wide committees;
• Assist in identifying problems and trends across the University;
• Form the basis of positive publicity, in demonstrating that identified issues have been resolved;
• Be made available to the Students' Union