DATE: December 13, 2021
PARTIES: Mr. O.R. (the “Student”) v. Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering
HEARING DATE(S): December 13, 2021, hybrid hearing (mix of both in-person and electronic via Zoom)
Committee Members:
Professor Stephen Waddams, Chair
Professor Ron Levi, Faculty Governor
Ms. Mozynah Nofal, Student Governor
Hearing Secretary:
Mr. Christopher Lang, Director, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
Appearances:
For the Student Appellant:
The Student
For the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering:
Professor Thomas Coyle, Vice-Dean, Undergraduate Studies, Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering
The Student was unable to complete course work for three separate courses due to illness. The Student petitioned the Examination Committee of the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering (“Faculty”) for permission to complete the work for the three courses at later dates. The medical evidence was undisputed, and the Examination Committee agreed that accommodation was appropriate. The accommodation that was allowed was a retroactive withdrawal, explanations being given in identical words in respect of each course, without reference to the mark in one of the courses. Based on the accommodation, the Student did not incur any academic penalty, nor did he receive any academic credit, nor was he afforded the opportunity to complete the remaining requirements for the one course in which he received a grade. The Student appealed to the Faculty’s Academic Appeals Board, which dismissed the appeal on the ground that there was no evidence that the Student completed sufficient course work for the courses in question. The Student appealed to the Academic Appeals Committee (the “Committee”), stressing the distinction between the courses.
The Committee found that the grade received in the one course was indicative of some evidence that the Student completed sufficient course work for that course only. With respect to the other two courses, there was no evidence presented of the extent of the work completed. Consequently, the Committee found that the appeal should be allowed in part. The Student should be afforded an opportunity to complete the remaining requirements of the one course in which he received a grade during the Winter term of 2022, however, the appeal with respect to the other two courses is dismissed.