Appealing degree classification
Hey all, so I've somehow ended up ended up in a "he said, they said" situation, involving my degree classification.
Long story short, there was a case of defective procedure in a fourth-year course, which resulted in me getting an utterly horrible grade (around 15%). With such a grade, I technically could not proceed to fifth-year (integrated masters) however, the exam board agreed that there was a case of defective procedure and "set the course aside" for progression onto 5th year.
Now the issue, my current degree classification includes the 15%, which unsurprisingly changes my average (by around 4%), from a somewhat middle upper second (without the 15%) to a lower second (approx 1% from 2:1
).
In the meeting back in September between my advisor and I, the advisor said that "the course will be set aside for progression", which I did specifically ask "does this include for calculating the final classification?", which the response was "yes". However, I'm now having to deal with the head advisor who understood it as "it's only set aside for progression, not classification as well". The original advisor has been contacted for clarification but he's not responding...
This defective procedure incident happened to one other person so I have asked if they possibly got it in writing but they don't seem to have either. Of course, they are happy to corroborate as they were told the same but the prospects of two students versus the school isn't very bright.
Does anyone have any suggestions in how to proceed? Short of getting the original advisor to "clarify" or magically finding an email, I guess I should just accept the 2:2 (which I am happy for but it won't shake the feeling of being cheated).
Long story short, there was a case of defective procedure in a fourth-year course, which resulted in me getting an utterly horrible grade (around 15%). With such a grade, I technically could not proceed to fifth-year (integrated masters) however, the exam board agreed that there was a case of defective procedure and "set the course aside" for progression onto 5th year.
Now the issue, my current degree classification includes the 15%, which unsurprisingly changes my average (by around 4%), from a somewhat middle upper second (without the 15%) to a lower second (approx 1% from 2:1
). In the meeting back in September between my advisor and I, the advisor said that "the course will be set aside for progression", which I did specifically ask "does this include for calculating the final classification?", which the response was "yes". However, I'm now having to deal with the head advisor who understood it as "it's only set aside for progression, not classification as well". The original advisor has been contacted for clarification but he's not responding...
This defective procedure incident happened to one other person so I have asked if they possibly got it in writing but they don't seem to have either. Of course, they are happy to corroborate as they were told the same but the prospects of two students versus the school isn't very bright.
Does anyone have any suggestions in how to proceed? Short of getting the original advisor to "clarify" or magically finding an email, I guess I should just accept the 2:2 (which I am happy for but it won't shake the feeling of being cheated).
Accept your grade. You did not work hard enough, or maybe all students should appeal?
Original post by random_matt
Accept your grade. You did not work hard enough, or maybe all students should appeal?
Very useful response but why don't you try reading the original post?
I'm not saying "I deserve a higher classification" or "I'm unhappy with a 2:2" (as mentioned above, I'm perfectly content) but instead, the university saying one thing (not including the "defective procedure"-ed module) and then doing the opposite. Leaves a rather bitter taste.
As for working harder, I'm sure you'll do great if you had to effectively do a master's level course in physics whilst you studied Maths. Some similarity? Sure but you'll still lack the years of required fundamental knowledge.
Reading between the lines, it sounds like the "defective procedure" was not in any way your responsibility.
Was it a kind of random event, or was it down to faulty procedures being used which were the responsibility of the university?
Th fact that the uni waived it to allow you to progress shows that discretion was used and that the university was taking responsibility.
Were you offered a chance to retake the assessment?
Did you think about appealing against the 15% last year?
Was it a kind of random event, or was it down to faulty procedures being used which were the responsibility of the university?
Th fact that the uni waived it to allow you to progress shows that discretion was used and that the university was taking responsibility.
Were you offered a chance to retake the assessment?
Did you think about appealing against the 15% last year?
(edited 10 months ago)
Original post by cheadle
Reading between the lines, it sounds like the "defective procedure" was not in any way your responsibility.
Was it a kind of random event, or was it down to faulty procedures being used which were the responsibility of the university?
Th fact that the uni waived it to allow you to progress shows that discretion was used and that the university was taking responsibility.
Were you offered a chance to retake the assessment?
Did you think about appealing against the 15% last year?
Was it a kind of random event, or was it down to faulty procedures being used which were the responsibility of the university?
Th fact that the uni waived it to allow you to progress shows that discretion was used and that the university was taking responsibility.
Were you offered a chance to retake the assessment?
Did you think about appealing against the 15% last year?
Faulty procedures were being used which were the responsibility of the university.
A chance to retake the assessment was offered and taken but the best analogy I can give is a fourth-year physicist taking a fourth-year math class. Some similarity? Sure but you're still going to have to effectively learn 3 years' worth of underlying knowledge in 10 weeks...
The 15% was appealed indirectly, which is where the following decision came from:
A. allow us to progress with no penalty
B. it will not be used for calculating our final classification (explicitly asked during the decision meeting)
This is what was communicated to us (via meetings, not written). No further action was taken due to being told that both issues are resolved (i.e. can progress and also won't be counted for classification).
Now the problem is that the advisor that conveyed this is uncontactable at the moment whilst the head advisor understood it as only point A is applicable. Not point B.
I mean if it is a 2:2, so be it but it's really not nice when the school promises one thing and then does the opposite.
Original post by cheadle
Is it your understanding that if the original advisor makes contact, and if they confirms what you say was said, that the 15% will not be used in the calculations?
Yes, that is correct. As it was quite a substantial amount of credits, it will raise my average by 4%, dragging my average straight into a middle-of-the-road 2:1 (which I would consider not really scraping either).
Looking at chat logs with the aforementioned "other person" who also had the identical situation, we very clearly wrote "yay, finally resolved, we get to progress and it will be disregarded from calculation" (paraphrased) to each other straight after the meetings so I am not misremembering.
I guess it hinges on the memory of the original advisor...what's worse is when two members of the exam board seemingly understood the decision differently from day one
Original post by Anonymous
Faulty procedures were being used which were the responsibility of the university.
A chance to retake the assessment was offered and taken but the best analogy I can give is a fourth-year physicist taking a fourth-year math class. Some similarity? Sure but you're still going to have to effectively learn 3 years' worth of underlying knowledge in 10 weeks...
The 15% was appealed indirectly, which is where the following decision came from:
A. allow us to progress with no penalty
B. it will not be used for calculating our final classification (explicitly asked during the decision meeting)
This is what was communicated to us (via meetings, not written). No further action was taken due to being told that both issues are resolved (i.e. can progress and also won't be counted for classification).
Now the problem is that the advisor that conveyed this is uncontactable at the moment whilst the head advisor understood it as only point A is applicable. Not point B.
I mean if it is a 2:2, so be it but it's really not nice when the school promises one thing and then does the opposite.
A chance to retake the assessment was offered and taken but the best analogy I can give is a fourth-year physicist taking a fourth-year math class. Some similarity? Sure but you're still going to have to effectively learn 3 years' worth of underlying knowledge in 10 weeks...
The 15% was appealed indirectly, which is where the following decision came from:
A. allow us to progress with no penalty
B. it will not be used for calculating our final classification (explicitly asked during the decision meeting)
This is what was communicated to us (via meetings, not written). No further action was taken due to being told that both issues are resolved (i.e. can progress and also won't be counted for classification).
Now the problem is that the advisor that conveyed this is uncontactable at the moment whilst the head advisor understood it as only point A is applicable. Not point B.
I mean if it is a 2:2, so be it but it's really not nice when the school promises one thing and then does the opposite.
Wasn't this put in writing? What advice has the union given you?
Original post by Muttley79
Wasn't this put in writing? What advice has the union given you?
Not in writing and based on the emails from head advisors, it seems that the board of examiners did not take minutes for the progression meeting either. Head advisor has specified there is a single email from September between advisors involving this decision...and it is also ambiguous...
Union wise, no response yet.
Original post by Anonymous
Not in writing and based on the emails from head advisors, it seems that the board of examiners did not take minutes for the progression meeting either. Head advisor has specified there is a single email from September between advisors involving this decision...and it is also ambiguous...
Union wise, no response yet.
Union wise, no response yet.
That sounds pretty inefficient - no notes at all? Surely that's a breach of regulations?
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Can I sue my uni for administrative error in my final degree classification?
- Degree classification
- Grade?
- I got 69% and the uni refuse to add
- Is there any point in trying for a remark?
- I failed my degree at Queen Marys and im struggling to understand my options
- Degree classification borderline question , pre- ponderance rule
- University coursework mark unfairly graded
- Is it worth appealing degree grade?
- doing a degree without knowing the career you want
- I think they calculated my degree average wrong - advice?
- Final degree mark help
- Degree result
- Uni Of Southampton final classification
- Request for reconsideration rejection
- 59,75% on my 2nd year of Law, 2:2 or 2:1?
- University ranking
- I got a 2.1 in second year and third year and still got awarded a 2.2
- Uni grade 69.67
- Degree Classification Mistake
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
Got a third in my second year and the highest I’ve achieved in third year was 55%Trending
Last reply 3 weeks ago
Got a third in my second year and the highest I’ve achieved in third year was 55%
