DATE:
February 9, 2024
PARTIES:
P.Y. ("the Student"). v. the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering
HEARING DATE(S):
November 17, 2023 via Zoom
COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Sara Farherty, Chair
Professor Nhung Tuyet Tran, Faculty Governor
Dveeta Lal, Student Governor
SECRETARY:
Nadia Bruno, Special Projects Officer, Office of Appeals, Discipline and Faculty Grievances
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE STUDENT APPELLANT:
Thomas Mathew, Counsel, Thomas Mathews Litigation
The Student
FOR THE FACULTY OF APPLIED SCIENCE & ENGINEERING
Professor Thomas Coyle, Vice Dean, Undergraduate
The Student appeals from the decision by the Faculty of Engineering’s Academic Appeals Board (the “AAB”), denying the Student’s request to continue his studies in the Faculty of Engineering (the “Faculty”). The Student required permission to continue in the Faculty’s program because they had been refused further registration on the basis of the grade in ECE241H1 Digital Systems (the “Course”).
In the course of the appeal, the Student requested that the Academic Appeals Committee (the “Committee”) award three different remedies. First, the Student requested Aegrotat standing which would give them credit for the Course but exclude the Course from calculations of their grade point average, because they were ill while writing the exam for the Course. Second, the Student requested an assessed mark that excludes the low final exam grade and would result in a mark above the required threshold. Third, the Student requested a Late Withdrawal without Academic Penalty on compassionate grounds because his mark was affected by circumstances outside his control.
The Student requested Aegrotat standing due to his illness during the exam, which the Committee noted was corroborated by a Verification of Student Illness form. The Committee stated that while Aegrotat standing would have been appropriate if the Student had abandoned the final assessment, the Student’s decision to complete the exam made Aegrotat an inappropriate remedy.
The Committee found that the AAB was justified in refusing to assign an assessed mark to the Student. The Committee noted that the AAB’s decision rested on their evaluation of the difference between the mark the Student earned on the final exam in the Course, and their other closely supervised work in the Course. In particular, the Student sought to the grades earned in the course from laboratory work (“Lab Work”) included in the Faculty’s evaluation for the purpose of assigning an assessed mark to the Student. The Committee found that the Faculty was justified in excluding the Student’s Lab Work in making such evaluation and was willing to defer to the Faculty Committee members and their academic judgement on the issue. The Committee noted that its conclusion would be more certain if the Faculty had established guidelines regarding the assignment of assessed marks.
With respect to the Student’s request for a Late Withdrawal from the Courseed for a Student at the University to be allowed to withdraw from a course after the drop deadline and even after an exam is written. The Committee noted that the Student’s clear medical documentation, and prompt request for late withdrawal one day following the exam, supported the Student’s request for a LWD on compassionate grounds. Since the Faculty had a policy against allowing students to repeat courses that have already been completed, as in this case, the Committee held that, if the course is required for graduation, the Student must be permitted to take this course, or a suitable substitute course.
Finally, the Committee did not find the decision of the AAB to be reasonable in view of its brief reasons. In particular, it found that the AAB’s decision did not illuminate the Faculty’s reasoning and made it difficult for the Committee to assess what factors were important in their decision, and whether the Student was treated fairly in the process. The Committee further stated that clarity in the Faculty’s policies and explanations for decisions are important components of a fair grading and appeal system.
The Committee allowed the appeal.