Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 11424
Submitted: January 18, 2024 at 12:26:18 AM
First Name: Julie
Last Name: Nguyen
Pronoun: She/Her
Student Number: 20339151
Email: 21jtn4@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BScH
Plan: BCHM
Level of Study: 2
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Code: MATH 121
Term: Fall/Winter
Year: 2022
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Ping Li, Michael Cabral, Sonja Ruzic
Section/Class Number: 001
Code: CHEM 211
Term: Fall
Year: 2023
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Peng Wang
Section/Class Number: 001
Code: CHEM 212
Term: Fall
Year: 2023
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Jason Vlahakis
Section/Class Number: 001
Level 1 Status
Status: DeniedLevel 2
Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 266
Submitted: March 4, 2024 at 10:04:27 PM
Relevant Petition: 11424
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: MATH 121, Fall/Winter 2022 (Ping Li, Michael Cabral, Sonja Ruzic)
Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: CHEM 211, Fall 2023 (Peng Wang)
Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: CHEM 212, Fall 2023 (Jason Vlahakis)
Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: CHEM 211, Fall 2023 (Peng Wang)
Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: CHEM 212, Fall 2023 (Jason Vlahakis)
Appeal Grounds
Appeals to the Board of Studies must include a letter based on one or more of the Grounds for Appeal (Appeal Regulation 3.4). What are the grounds you are basing your appeal on?
- The Associate Dean's decision did not follow the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as the Associate Dean failed to:
- Make a reasonable decision in your appeal. A “reasonable” decision is one that is based on evidence, thought out and supported by facts and logical inferences from the facts. To be reasonable, the decision must contain adequate reasons for the conclusions.
Appeal Grounds Details: I am appealing on the grounds that my petition's decision was not reasonable. Unfortunately, it seemed that many details of my petition were overlooked.
- The Associate Dean (Academic) stated that I had already received academic consideration. This is objectively false. I had made it clear in my petition that I had not received any academic consideration for any of the petitioned courses.
- It was assumed that my grandma's death was sudden. I want to clarify that she was gravely ill before she passed away.
- The decision was based on marks I received for particular assessments without consideration for the nature of the assessments (they are not comparable to the exam).
- I had addressed in my petition why I could not drop my courses, but this was ignored.
- The Associate Dean (Academic) stated that I had already received academic consideration. This is objectively false. I had made it clear in my petition that I had not received any academic consideration for any of the petitioned courses.
- It was assumed that my grandma's death was sudden. I want to clarify that she was gravely ill before she passed away.
- The decision was based on marks I received for particular assessments without consideration for the nature of the assessments (they are not comparable to the exam).
- I had addressed in my petition why I could not drop my courses, but this was ignored.
Appeal Letter
Appeal Letter: The system is not letting me submit. I suspect it may be a problem with this box. I have tried linking to my appeal letter as it seems providing the full text is causing problems.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y3c8eEZKUUOiT_K4fsZxOQjldBIw6zNasfQAnBksx_o/edit?usp=sharing
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Y3c8eEZKUUOiT_K4fsZxOQjldBIw6zNasfQAnBksx_o/edit?usp=sharing