DATE: May 10, 2005
PARTIES: Ms. S. (the Appellant) v. UTSC
Hearing Date(s): April 29, 2005
Committee Members:
Assistant Dean Bonnie Goldberg, Chair
Dr. Pamela Catton
Prof. Yuki Johnson
Ms. Fancouse Ko
Prof. Arthur Ripstein
Acting Secretary:
Mr. Andrew Drummond
In Attendance:
Ms. S., the Appellant
Associate Dean Nick Cheng, UTSC
UTSC – request to write deferred examination – subsequent request for late withdrawal without academic penalty – 3 examinations over two–day period – anxiety and stress – examinations were not consecutive – UTSC standard for medical documentation not met – rules regarding deferred examinations understood – no ameliorative steps to seek academic assistance or reduce course load – confusion regarding difference between UTSC policy and Faculty of Arts and Science policy did not sufficiently disadvantage Student – appeal dismissed
Request to write a deferred examination in one course. The request was made a day before the examination. The Student filed a subsequent request for late withdrawal without academic penalty because of the length of the time that had passed between the examination period and the Committee hearing. The Student was scheduled to write 3 examinations over a two–day period, one of which, the subject of the appeal, she did not write. The Student claimed that she was suffering anxiety and stress and she found it difficult to write three exams in 30 hours. The Committee found that the Student was not entitled to relief on the grounds that she was writing three examinations over a two–day period because the examinations were not consecutive. The Committee found that the Student did not meet the UTSC standard for medical documentation necessary to receive relief: the documentation did not prove that the Student was incapacitated; it did not indicate that one examination was more likely to be affected than another; and it did not refer to the Student’s decision not to write the examination. The Committee found that the Student understood the rules regarding deferred examinations as she had had a previous request to defer an examination approved by the Faculty. The Committee found that the Student was aware of her academic difficulties yet did not take ameliorative steps to seek academic assistance or reduce her course load. The Committee found that the Student’s confusion regarding the policy for re–writing examinations at UTSC and the different policy at the Faculty of Arts and Science aggravated her situation but that the confusion did not sufficiently disadvantage her so as to necessitate providing relief. Appeal dismissed.