i failed a module which was not my fault and was withdrawn from uni!!!!!!! Watch

thatguyric
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 11 months ago
#1
i am a first year resit student and i failed a module which wasn't my fault. the module i failed had 2 semesters (A&B). i did the exam in semester A but i was too sick to attend the one in semester B so therefore i was granted a deferred referral which allowed me to do the exam later on in the summer. there was an exam announcement on the online uni portal to all students i stating

" This message is only for those whose final mark for "Economics Tools and Techniques" is between 20% and 39% or those who have successfully deferred one of the two in-class tests (or both)..................You will need to sit both parts, regardless of your previous marks in the Semester A and the Semester B tests."

but when i got to the exam they didn't let me do the semester A one just semester B one and i failed.

i appealed to the dean of business and the vice chancellor and they chose to dismiss my appeal

both of them replied that i didn't i submit an extenuating circumstances to defer semester A but the exam announcement clearly says "those who have successfully deferred one of the two in-class tests (or both)..................You will need to sit both parts, regardless of your previous marks in the Semester A and the Semester B tests"

i also received a letter from the associate dean saying " the announcement was generic not to my individual account'' but if it was generic and i deffered one in class test that announcement still applies to me

i feel finessed and conned i have exhausted all the internal procedures and i don't want to go to the OIA ( office of the Independent adjudicator) as they have a low success rate and can take up to 1 year to process a complaint

is there anything else i can do to be put back on my course and progress to second year
0
reply
999tigger
Badges: 19
#2
Report 11 months ago
#2
(Original post by thatguyric)
i am a first year resit student and i failed a module which wasn't my fault. the module i failed had 2 semesters (A&B). i did the exam in semester A but i was too sick to attend the one in semester B so therefore i was granted a deferred referral which allowed me to do the exam later on in the summer. there was an exam announcement on the online uni portal to all students i stating

" This message is only for those whose final mark for "Economics Tools and Techniques" is between 20% and 39% or those who have successfully deferred one of the two in-class tests (or both)..................You will need to sit both parts, regardless of your previous marks in the Semester A and the Semester B tests."

but when i got to the exam they didn't let me do the semester A one just semester B one and i failed.

i appealed to the dean of business and the vice chancellor and they chose to dismiss my appeal

both of them replied that i didn't i submit an extenuating circumstances to defer semester A but the exam announcement clearly says "those who have successfully deferred one of the two in-class tests (or both)..................You will need to sit both parts, regardless of your previous marks in the Semester A and the Semester B tests"

i also received a letter from the associate dean saying " the announcement was generic not to my individual account'' but if it was generic and i deffered one in class test that announcement still applies to me

i feel finessed and conned i have exhausted all the internal procedures and i don't want to go to the OIA ( office of the Independent adjudicator) as they have a low success rate and can take up to 1 year to process a complaint

is there anything else i can do to be put back on my course and progress to second year

Sorry have read ut but its not quite making sense to me and its easier for you to explain than me read it again.


1. You are a first year student.
2. You have a module that is split into A + B
3. You managed to sit A, but successfully deferred B to the summer.
4. The first message appears to apply to you if your grades were in that range.
5. That leaves you with instructions that you need to resit the whole exam.
6. You get to the exam and despite the message they wont let you sit A [presumably you had already passed it?] but you sat B and failed.
7. Did you fail because you failed part B or because you werent allowed to sit part A?
8. Imo you are correct on the point if your grades were in that range it appears legitimate that it applied to you because you fell in the traget group and it is not unreasonable that you acted on it otherwise what would be the point of the message if people could ignore it ? Its a nonsensical argument by the uni unless im missing something.
9. It is important to get the exact story hence its better you see the uni adviser to make sure your version makes sense. Theres often a Uni rep on TSR and there was also a law lecturer posting last year in this sub forum.



Based on all the above I make these points:


1. Its unclear whether these were first attempts or resits. The way its written it is first attempts.
2.I think the email applies to you and its not unreasonable to expect to follow it i.e want to sit A and B. the fact they wouldnt let you sit A is unclear in its significance as to whether thats the reason you failed?
It would have been better for you to clarify with the invigilators or department.
3. As it is it looks like you failed because either- you werent allowed to sit A or because you failed the exam for B.
4. My question is if you were ready to sit A and they refused to let you sit it, but the e-mail told you you should then its their actions that made sitting A and B impossible i.e they caused you to fail.
5. In the event you failed because you failed part B, then then next option should be a capped resit next summer as a deferred attempt due to illness should be a first attempt and the rules should confirm that.
6. You need someone to look at it and get an accurate chain of events as I have concerns its not the whole story. This is why interviews are invaluable as well as looking at their reasoned answer and not just your version of what you think is relevant.
7. There should be a further appeal on very limited grounds, but i have a feeling that both your appeals to fail were not well written. I am guessing. Appeals can only be o very definite grounds.
8. All of this is built upon your version of events being correct and my understanding being what happened. Im not doing it again.
9. Your options are i) appeal the appeal but you say youve done that or hinted at it. ii) sue them. iii) OIA. there is no speedy answer.
10 Its likely the student advisor is going to be limited. imo you need to get at least a law student to look at the situation or someone who has attention to detail and analytical skills. If it works out they are wrong then you have to decide if you want to fight it.
11. They could be wrong on making it impossible for you to pass.
12. They could be wrong in not giving you a capped chance to resit B.

Anyway GL and hope you get it looked at properly.
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top

University open days

  • University of Hertfordshire
    All Subjects Undergraduate
    Sat, 12 Oct '19
  • University of Hertfordshire
    All Subjects Postgraduate
    Wed, 6 Nov '19
  • University of Hertfordshire
    All Subjects Undergraduate
    Sat, 16 Nov '19

What's your favourite genre?

Rock (203)
23.52%
Pop (214)
24.8%
Jazz (33)
3.82%
Classical (48)
5.56%
Hip-Hop (166)
19.24%
Electronic (60)
6.95%
Indie (139)
16.11%

Watched Threads

View All