Procedures

I. General

1. Concordia University affirms the right of students to request the re-evaluation of coursework which includes tests, examinations, essays and other work that has contributed to the grading of a course. It is assumed that initiating a formal re-evaluation (“a re-evaluation request”) is a last recourse, taken when prior and sincere attempts to resolve problems and disagreements informally and directly have failed.
2. Students have the right to see their coursework. Students are responsible for the preservation of any material, in its entire and original form, which has been returned to them. A re-evaluation request may be refused if this material is not available.
3. Instructors are responsible for the preservation of coursework that has not been returned to students as follows: until December 31 of the next calendar year for Fall term courses; until April 30 of the next calendar year for Fall/Winter and Winter term courses; and until August 31 of the next calendar year for Summer term courses.
4. In cases where grades are received for activities other than written or artistic coursework, such as class participation, oral presentations, oral examinations and performance, no re-evaluation is normally possible. However, every attempt shall be made by the instructor concerned and the Chair of the Department to address the concerns raised by the student.
5. The grounds for a re-evaluation request are restricted to claims that i) a miscalculation of the grade occurred; or ii) the evaluation of the work was demonstrably unfair.
6. A grade may be maintained, raised or lowered as a result of a re-evaluation request.

II. Procedure

7. Students who are dissatisfied with the grade received on one or more pieces of coursework shall first attempt to meet with the instructor and explain their position. If the student remains dissatisfied or is unable to meet with the instructor, he or she may, upon receiving the final grade for the course, make a re-evaluation request.
8. A re-evaluation request shall be made on an “Academic Re-evaluation Request” form available at the Birks Student Service Centre. The student shall specify the reasons for seeking the re-evaluation and shall indicate what informal attempts towards re-evaluation have been made. A processing fee must accompany the request. (See the Tuition and Fees section of the Calendar for the current fee).
9. A re-evaluation request with respect to a Fall term course must be made no later than the following February 1; with respect to a Fall/Winter or Winter term course, no later than the following June 15 and with respect to a Summer term course, no later than the following October 1. These deadlines may be extended by the Registrar in particular cases if the student can provide evidence that he or she was unable to have acted within the deadlines.
10. The Registrar shall forward the re-evaluation request to the Chair of the appropriate Department.
11. The Chair shall decide whether the re-evaluation request conforms to the criteria outlined in articles 4 and 5 above within ten (10) days of receiving the re-evaluation request.
12. If the Chair decides that the re-evaluation request does not conform to the criteria outlined in articles 4 and 5 above, he or she shall communicate this decision with reasons, in writing, to the student with a copy to the Registrar. Should the student disagree with this decision, he or she has the right to appeal the Chair’s decision to Re-evaluation Appeals Panel as set out in article 25 below.
13. Requests for review or other consideration which do not conform to the grounds for a re-evaluation request may fall under the purview of the Chair, the Dean, the Student Request Committee or other mechanisms.
14. If the Chair decides that the re-evaluation request conforms to the criteria outlined in articles 4 and 5 above, he or she shall appoint a re-evaluator whose name shall be communicated to the student and to the instructor concerned. Normally, the re-evaluator shall not be an instructor in whose course the student is registered at that time.
15. Before the re-evaluation begins, the instructor shall provide the Chair with information regarding the nature and structure of the course as well as the evaluation criteria and methods used. The Chair shall communicate this information to the re-evaluator.
16. The entire piece of work identified by the student shall be re-evaluated. The re-evaluator may request additional input from the student or the instructor.

17. The re-evaluation shall normally be completed within thirty (30) days of the Chair’s decision that the re-evaluation shall proceed. If it becomes clear that the thirty (30) day delay cannot be met, the Chair shall immediately communicate this information to the student in order to determine whether any serious difficulties may arise from extending the delay.

    In the case where the thirty (30) day delay is extended, every effort shall be made to remedy any academic disadvantage that the student may experience as a consequence of the extension of the delay.

18. Upon completion of the re-evaluation, the re-evaluator shall assign a grade to the work in question and shall forward the re-evaluated material to the Chair along with a reasoned report. The reasoned report shall make mention of the documentation and methodology used.

    The Chair shall communicate the re-evaluation decision, in writing, along with the reasoned report, to the student, the instructor and the Registrar as well as whether the final grade for the course will be modified as a result of the re-evaluation decision.
19. In cases where there is a significant discrepancy between the original grade assigned and the grade assigned by the re-evaluator, the Chair may convene a meeting with the instructor and the re-evaluator in order to discuss the issue before communicating the decision to the parties concerned. If disagreement as to the discrepancy remains after the meeting, the re-evaluator’s grade shall stand.
20. In cases where the re-evaluation decision reveals a generalized flaw in the original evaluation process, the Chair shall take appropriate steps to ensure that the grades of other students in the course are reviewed and modified if appropriate.
21. A final grade that is modified as a result of the re-evaluation shall be entered onto the student’s academic record and transcript. If no appeal is filed, the modified grade shall permanently replace the original grade on the student’s academic record and transcript. If an appeal is filed, an interim notation to the effect that the grade is “under appeal” shall accompany the grade until the final disposition of the case.

III. Appeals

22. A permanent Secretary of the Re-evaluation Appeals Panel (“RAP”) (the Secretary) shall be appointed by the Secretary-General. The Secretary shall be responsible for the administrative functioning of the RAP and shall maintain the confidential files of the RAP.
23. A RAP of three (3) members, as well as a non-voting Chair, shall be selected by the Secretary for a given appeal. The RAP shall be composed of two (2) faculty members drawn from the Faculty Tribunal Pool and one (1) student drawn from the Student Tribunal Pool as provided for under the Policy for the Establishment of Tribunal Hearing Pools. Every attempt will be made to select the student member from the student’s constituency (undergraduate or graduate status).
24. A student or instructor may appeal a re-evaluation decision based on either substantive grounds or on the presence of serious and prejudicial procedural defects. In the case of an appeal from an instructor, “prejudicial” shall be limited to the effect that the alleged procedural defect has on other students in the course or on the academic standards of the University. The appeal must state in clear and precise terms the grounds on which the appeal is based. Such an appeal must be made, in writing, to the Secretary within fifteen (15) days after the date of transmission of the re-evaluation decision.
25. A student may appeal a Chair’s decision that the re-evaluation request did not conform to the criteria outlined in articles 4 and 5 above. This appeal may be based on either substantive grounds or on the presence of serious and prejudicial procedural defects in the Chair’s consideration of the re-evaluation request. The appeal must state in clear and precise terms the grounds on which the appeal is based. Such an appeal must be made, in writing, to the Secretary within fifteen (15) days after the date of transmission of the Chair’s decision.

26. Upon receipt of an appeal from a student, the Secretary shall send a copy to the Registrar, the Chair, the instructor and the re-evaluator, if appropriate, soliciting their input within ten (10) days. Any input received within the ten (10) day period shall be forwarded to all parties soliciting their comments on the input within a further ten (10) days. All input and comments received within the twenty (20) day period shall form part of the dossier submitted to the RAP.

    Upon receipt of an appeal from an instructor, the Secretary shall send a copy to the Registrar, the Chair, the student and the re-evaluator, if appropriate, soliciting their input within ten (10) days. Any input received within the ten (10) day period shall be forwarded to all parties soliciting their comments on the input within a further ten (10) days. All input and comments received within the twenty (20) day period shall form part of the dossier submitted to the RAP.
27. The RAP shall render a decision, based on the written record only, normally within thirty (30) days of the filing of an appeal. The RAP shall meet at least once in person before rendering its reasoned decision.
28. In the case of an appeal of a re-evaluation decision, should the RAP determine that serious and prejudicial procedural defects were present in the re-evaluation process or that there are substantive grounds necessitating a new re-evaluation, it shall instruct the Chair to arrange for a new re-evaluation.
29. Should the RAP decide that an appeal be upheld in the case of an appeal of a Chair’s decision that the re-evaluation request did not conform to the criteria outlined in articles 4 and 5 above, it shall instruct the Dean to arrange for a re-evaluation independent of the relevant Chair.
30. The RAP shall communicate its signed, dated and reasoned decision to the student, the instructor, the re-evaluator (if appropriate), the Chair and the Registrar and shall include copies of all documentation considered.
31. The decision of the RAP is final.

IV. Miscellaneous Provisions

32. The word “days” is defined as working days which excludes weekends, holidays and other days during which the University is closed.
    In the calculation of any delay set out in these procedures, the months of July and August shall not be taken into account. In the case of an appeal submitted to the RAP before July 1, the regular delays set out in these procedures shall apply.
33. Any written notice addressed to a student pursuant to Section III – Appeals under these procedures shall be sent by courier to the last address provided by the student to the University and shall be deemed to be perceived one (1) day after delivery.
34. If the course in question was taught by the Chair, the Dean shall assume all of the duties imposed on the Chair in these procedures. If the course in question does not form part of a department, the re-evaluation request shall be forwarded to the appropriate administrator responsible for the course.
35. The overall responsibility for the implementation and recommended amendments to these procedures shall rest with the Provost.

Adopted by Senate on May 29, 1998 and amended by Senate on May 19, 2000 and September 14, 2001.

Top