Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 13189
Submitted: May 17, 2025 at 11:43:14 PM
First Name: Rinusha
Last Name: Piranthapan
Pronoun: She/Her
Preferred Name: Rinusha
Student Number: 20354955
Email: 21rp74@queensu.ca
Degree Program: Bsc
Plan: Life Science Specialization
Level of Study: 3
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Code: COMM 200
Term: Winter
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Instructor's Name: Douglas Reid
Section/Class Number: Comm 200 - Online
Component: Peer Evaluation
Petition Letter
Petition Letter: Dear Associate Dean,
I am writing to formally petition the final grade I received in COMM 200 for the Winter 2025 term.Despite multiple attempts to resolve this concern directly with the course instructor, Professor Douglas Reid, I believe that my final grade is inaccurate and does not fairly reflect my performance in the course—particularly in relation to the peer evaluation component.
I am submitting this petition on the grounds of procedural fairness and technical error, as outlined in the Student Academic Appeals Policy (SAAP).
My assignment grades throughout the COMM 200 course consistently averaged to an A-, as indicated by my “Grades” on OnQ. However, my final grade posted on SOLUS is a B, and Professor Reid has informed me that this is due to a supposed non-completion of one of the three required peer evaluations. According to the COMM 200 syllabus, students are required to complete every peer evaluation on time and in full to avoid a 10% deduction from their final course grade. I do not believe this penalty was fairly applied. I am confident that I completed all three peer evaluations on time and in full, and I have multiple forms of supporting evidence.
Specifically, I prepared and submitted feedback for Peer Evaluations #1, #2, #3 on the Capsim platform. First, I maintained a Google Document where I drafted individualized feedback for each group member before submitting the evaluations on Capsim. The document’s edit history includes time-stamped entries that clearly show all three sets of feedback were prepared in advance of their respective deadlines. I used this as a backup in case Capsim failed to properly save my responses, which I now suspect may have occurred.
Second, the Capsim portal itself shows that I completed my self-ratings for each peer evaluation. These self-ratings cannot be submitted without completing the peer evaluation form itself. The self-ratings are a required component of the peer evaluation process, meaning that if my self-ratings were recorded, then my participation in the peer evaluations must have been acknowledged by the system. This further supports my position that I did, in fact, complete the required evaluations. I have included a screenshot of this page for your reference.
In addition, I have maintained messages with my team members in which we confirmed the due dates for each peer evaluation, further demonstrating that I was aware of these deadlines and took steps to ensure my evaluations were submitted on time. This is consistent with my overall approach to the course, as I made it a point to submit all assignments on time or well before the deadlines.
I have respectfully and repeatedly asked Professor Reid to clarify which specific peer evaluation is claimed to be “missed” or incomplete. Unfortunately, I have not received a clear answer. This lack of transparency has made it impossible for me to fully understand or respond to the issue, which I believe constitutes a lack of procedural fairness. Furthermore, I feel my concerns about a potential technical issue have not been acknowledged or taken seriously.
As someone who has consistently submitted course assignments ahead of deadlines and taken care to meet course expectations, I find this situation extremely discouraging—especially given the weight this grade carries in my academic record. I am a Life Sciences student with aspirations of applying to medical school, and a one-grade drop can have a significant impact on my GPA and future opportunities.
In light of the evidence provided, I respectfully request that my final grade be re-evaluated, or that a more thorough review of the Capsim platform records be conducted to verify my submission history. I am confident that this will confirm that I fulfilled all peer evaluation requirements and that a technical issue may have contributed to this discrepancy.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration. I am happy to provide any additional information or documentation if needed.
Sincerely,
Rinusha Piranthapan
Student ID: 20354955
I am writing to formally petition the final grade I received in COMM 200 for the Winter 2025 term.Despite multiple attempts to resolve this concern directly with the course instructor, Professor Douglas Reid, I believe that my final grade is inaccurate and does not fairly reflect my performance in the course—particularly in relation to the peer evaluation component.
I am submitting this petition on the grounds of procedural fairness and technical error, as outlined in the Student Academic Appeals Policy (SAAP).
My assignment grades throughout the COMM 200 course consistently averaged to an A-, as indicated by my “Grades” on OnQ. However, my final grade posted on SOLUS is a B, and Professor Reid has informed me that this is due to a supposed non-completion of one of the three required peer evaluations. According to the COMM 200 syllabus, students are required to complete every peer evaluation on time and in full to avoid a 10% deduction from their final course grade. I do not believe this penalty was fairly applied. I am confident that I completed all three peer evaluations on time and in full, and I have multiple forms of supporting evidence.
Specifically, I prepared and submitted feedback for Peer Evaluations #1, #2, #3 on the Capsim platform. First, I maintained a Google Document where I drafted individualized feedback for each group member before submitting the evaluations on Capsim. The document’s edit history includes time-stamped entries that clearly show all three sets of feedback were prepared in advance of their respective deadlines. I used this as a backup in case Capsim failed to properly save my responses, which I now suspect may have occurred.
Second, the Capsim portal itself shows that I completed my self-ratings for each peer evaluation. These self-ratings cannot be submitted without completing the peer evaluation form itself. The self-ratings are a required component of the peer evaluation process, meaning that if my self-ratings were recorded, then my participation in the peer evaluations must have been acknowledged by the system. This further supports my position that I did, in fact, complete the required evaluations. I have included a screenshot of this page for your reference.
In addition, I have maintained messages with my team members in which we confirmed the due dates for each peer evaluation, further demonstrating that I was aware of these deadlines and took steps to ensure my evaluations were submitted on time. This is consistent with my overall approach to the course, as I made it a point to submit all assignments on time or well before the deadlines.
I have respectfully and repeatedly asked Professor Reid to clarify which specific peer evaluation is claimed to be “missed” or incomplete. Unfortunately, I have not received a clear answer. This lack of transparency has made it impossible for me to fully understand or respond to the issue, which I believe constitutes a lack of procedural fairness. Furthermore, I feel my concerns about a potential technical issue have not been acknowledged or taken seriously.
As someone who has consistently submitted course assignments ahead of deadlines and taken care to meet course expectations, I find this situation extremely discouraging—especially given the weight this grade carries in my academic record. I am a Life Sciences student with aspirations of applying to medical school, and a one-grade drop can have a significant impact on my GPA and future opportunities.
In light of the evidence provided, I respectfully request that my final grade be re-evaluated, or that a more thorough review of the Capsim platform records be conducted to verify my submission history. I am confident that this will confirm that I fulfilled all peer evaluation requirements and that a technical issue may have contributed to this discrepancy.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration. I am happy to provide any additional information or documentation if needed.
Sincerely,
Rinusha Piranthapan
Student ID: 20354955
Documentation
Document: Peer Review Screenshot.png
Document: Peer Review SS 2.png
Document: Peer Review SS 3.png
History
Originally submitted May 17, 2025 at 11:43:14 PM.
| Field | Reference | Old Value | New Value | Note | User | Date/Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| status | N/A | Received | Withdrawn | Kerri Andrews | 2025-05-23 3:26:15 PM |

