Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 13195
Submitted: May 19, 2025 at 5:44:52 PM
First Name: Alison
Last Name: Staples
Pronoun: She/Her
Student Number: 20333961
Email: 21aps9@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BSH
Plan: LISC
Level of Study: 4
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Drop a course after the academic deadline, Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Code: BCHM 316
Term: Winter
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Drop a course after the academic deadline
Code: BCHM 315
Term: Fall
Year: 2024
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Dr. Robert Campbell
Section/Class Number: 2024F
Petition Letter
Petition Letter: To: Associate Dean (Academic) Stephenson
Faculty of Arts and Science
Queen’s University
May 19th, 2025
Subject: Petition to Drop BCHM 316 (Winter 2025) and Credit Standing for BCHM 315 (Fall 2025)
Dear Associate Dean Stephenson,
I am writing a petition to drop BCHM 316, “Metabolism,” and receive a Credit Standing for BCHM 315 “Proteins and Enzymes,” retroactively, courses that I took during the Winter 2025 term and the Fall 2024 term. I recognize the seriousness of this request, and I deeply appreciate your time and consideration as I outline the extenuating circumstances that resulted in the need to make this request.
Over the past few years, I have undergone a profound personal and academic transformation, working hard to find my path in the face of challenges in my home life, which include significant parental expectations. For most of my undergraduate studies here at Queen’s, I was pursuing pre-med, enrolled in the Life Sciences Specialization stream and taking courses, like this one, as the required components for my degree. With the help of a growing support system, I am starting to gain clarity about my true interests and goals and have come to realize that a legal path aligns more closely with my passions and strengths. While this has brought me great excitement, it has also triggered a difficult transition period as I began to shift away from expectations shaped by long-standing family pressures.
Since the pandemic, my father has experienced ongoing mental health challenges, including significant anger issues and alcohol dependency. This has created a toxic, and at times unsafe, home environment, especially for the women in my family. As a result, I’ve often had to step into a caretaker role for both my mother and sister, who have endured their own emotional hardships. This dynamic influenced my decision to attend Queen’s (which is four hours from home), to move in with my aunt and her family in Toronto last summer, and to remain in Kingston this summer to maintain stability and independence with the support of my aunt and her family. Still, I continue to carry the emotional weight of this situation.
This year, I have been grappling with the weight of my parents’ expectations which are not in line with my dreams for my future. And yet, I felt unable to drop or alter my course selections this year as doing so would have required having an extremely difficult conversation with my father, including explaining that I was no longer pursuing medicine, that the tuition he was paying would be going towards a new set of goals or worse may have been non-refundable if courses were dropped later in the term. I feared this news would escalate tensions at home and cause further instability, not just for me, but for my mother and sister as well. In addition, during the 2025 Winter term, particularly during the final exam period, I was compelled to return home to support my family through a crisis involving my father’s job. This severely disrupted my ability to study and concentrate for my final exams.
I recognize now that I should have prioritized my well-being and future plans by changing my Life Science stream and dropping or changing these courses earlier, but the combination of fear, obligation, and emotional exhaustion left me paralyzed. These courses were my breaking point. While I succeeded in my other classes this year (receiving marks of A+, A+, A, A, A-, B+ (79), and B), I only struggled and unfortunately failed courses associated with the Specialization stream which are unnecessary for a Life Science Major student, particularly BCHM 316 and 316. Further, the results in these courses are outliers that do not reflect my academic abilities or commitment particularly in the context of third year which represents a shift towards my personal goals for the future.
Throughout this academic year and this coming summer, I am working hard towards taking control of my future by formally switching into the Life Sciences Major stream (from the Specialization) and committing to my preparation for law school. I am currently completing a Certificate in Law at Queen’s, studying for the LSAT (which I will write on August 9th), and actively preparing my law school applications to be sent out this November.
Although my family life remains complex, I am working to be in a much stronger position, both emotionally and academically. I am fully committed to my new direction, supported by a strong and growing network of people I trust, and taking concrete steps toward my chosen goals. I am proud of the growth and clarity I’ve achieved this year, despite the challenges I’ve faced. Providing a Credit Standing in BCHM 315 and a late drop standing for BCHM 316 would not only address the reality of my situation at the time, but would allow me to move forward on my new academic path without being hindered by a performance in problematic courses that do not represent my capabilities, my dreams for my future nor my commitment to my studies.
Thank you again for your time and consideration of my petitions.
Sincerely,
Alison Staples
20333961
Life Sciences Specialization
Faculty of Arts and Science
Queen’s University
May 19th, 2025
Subject: Petition to Drop BCHM 316 (Winter 2025) and Credit Standing for BCHM 315 (Fall 2025)
Dear Associate Dean Stephenson,
I am writing a petition to drop BCHM 316, “Metabolism,” and receive a Credit Standing for BCHM 315 “Proteins and Enzymes,” retroactively, courses that I took during the Winter 2025 term and the Fall 2024 term. I recognize the seriousness of this request, and I deeply appreciate your time and consideration as I outline the extenuating circumstances that resulted in the need to make this request.
Over the past few years, I have undergone a profound personal and academic transformation, working hard to find my path in the face of challenges in my home life, which include significant parental expectations. For most of my undergraduate studies here at Queen’s, I was pursuing pre-med, enrolled in the Life Sciences Specialization stream and taking courses, like this one, as the required components for my degree. With the help of a growing support system, I am starting to gain clarity about my true interests and goals and have come to realize that a legal path aligns more closely with my passions and strengths. While this has brought me great excitement, it has also triggered a difficult transition period as I began to shift away from expectations shaped by long-standing family pressures.
Since the pandemic, my father has experienced ongoing mental health challenges, including significant anger issues and alcohol dependency. This has created a toxic, and at times unsafe, home environment, especially for the women in my family. As a result, I’ve often had to step into a caretaker role for both my mother and sister, who have endured their own emotional hardships. This dynamic influenced my decision to attend Queen’s (which is four hours from home), to move in with my aunt and her family in Toronto last summer, and to remain in Kingston this summer to maintain stability and independence with the support of my aunt and her family. Still, I continue to carry the emotional weight of this situation.
This year, I have been grappling with the weight of my parents’ expectations which are not in line with my dreams for my future. And yet, I felt unable to drop or alter my course selections this year as doing so would have required having an extremely difficult conversation with my father, including explaining that I was no longer pursuing medicine, that the tuition he was paying would be going towards a new set of goals or worse may have been non-refundable if courses were dropped later in the term. I feared this news would escalate tensions at home and cause further instability, not just for me, but for my mother and sister as well. In addition, during the 2025 Winter term, particularly during the final exam period, I was compelled to return home to support my family through a crisis involving my father’s job. This severely disrupted my ability to study and concentrate for my final exams.
I recognize now that I should have prioritized my well-being and future plans by changing my Life Science stream and dropping or changing these courses earlier, but the combination of fear, obligation, and emotional exhaustion left me paralyzed. These courses were my breaking point. While I succeeded in my other classes this year (receiving marks of A+, A+, A, A, A-, B+ (79), and B), I only struggled and unfortunately failed courses associated with the Specialization stream which are unnecessary for a Life Science Major student, particularly BCHM 316 and 316. Further, the results in these courses are outliers that do not reflect my academic abilities or commitment particularly in the context of third year which represents a shift towards my personal goals for the future.
Throughout this academic year and this coming summer, I am working hard towards taking control of my future by formally switching into the Life Sciences Major stream (from the Specialization) and committing to my preparation for law school. I am currently completing a Certificate in Law at Queen’s, studying for the LSAT (which I will write on August 9th), and actively preparing my law school applications to be sent out this November.
Although my family life remains complex, I am working to be in a much stronger position, both emotionally and academically. I am fully committed to my new direction, supported by a strong and growing network of people I trust, and taking concrete steps toward my chosen goals. I am proud of the growth and clarity I’ve achieved this year, despite the challenges I’ve faced. Providing a Credit Standing in BCHM 315 and a late drop standing for BCHM 316 would not only address the reality of my situation at the time, but would allow me to move forward on my new academic path without being hindered by a performance in problematic courses that do not represent my capabilities, my dreams for my future nor my commitment to my studies.
Thank you again for your time and consideration of my petitions.
Sincerely,
Alison Staples
20333961
Life Sciences Specialization
Documentation
Professional Letter Detail: NO DOC
Document: Letter of Support Anne Benedetti.pdf
Document: Resume Alison Staples-0.pdf
Decision Letters
Level 1 Status
Status: Partial GrantLevel 2
Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 340
Submitted: August 26, 2025 at 4:57:05 PM
Relevant Petition: 13195
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: BCHM 315, Fall 2024 (Dr. Robert Campbell)
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:
- Follow the university rules and regulations in a way that supported your right to a fair process.
- 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 basis that the Associate Dean’s decision did not follow the rules of procedural fairness. Specifically:
Failure to follow university rules and regulations in a way that supported my right to a fair process.
Failure to make a reasonable decision supported by the available evidence.
As noted in the Associate Dean’s decision, she kindly acknowledged my circumstances but denied my petition for credit standing in BCMH 315 (F24) based on a concern that the requirements of Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4 had not been met.
To address this concern, my attached appeal letter provides a summary of the course requirements of BCHM 315 (F24) and evidence that the requirements set out in Regulation 1.7.1.4 have in fact been met.
To summarize the detailed information provided, I completed the required number of quizzes, both midterms, and the final exam, and I received a passing grade, which is consistent with the conditions for credit standing under Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4. To read the Academic Regulation otherwise is procedurally unfair as I relied on the course syllabus to complete the required number of quizzes and I attended and completed both midterms and the final exam.
It is also important to note that, in my experience, final exam grades are not uploaded to OnQ, which may explain the discrepancy in the course records. As mentioned above, I would welcome the opportunity for the Board to confirm my attendance through official university exam logs which I signed or any other means that may be helpful.
In accordance with procedural fairness, the Associate Dean’s decision was required to take into account all of the relevant information and to apply the rules and regulations in a manner that afforded a fair process. I appreciate that the Associate Dean kindly acknowledged my circumstances and noted that the only deficiency was a technical one based on Regulation 1.7.1.4. I further appreciate the opportunity to clarify and to provide the included information so that either the Associate Dean can review this information and reconsider her decision or this appeal can be reviewed by the Board of Studies.
Please see the attached appeal letter which provides additional detail, evidence and argument.
Failure to follow university rules and regulations in a way that supported my right to a fair process.
Failure to make a reasonable decision supported by the available evidence.
As noted in the Associate Dean’s decision, she kindly acknowledged my circumstances but denied my petition for credit standing in BCMH 315 (F24) based on a concern that the requirements of Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4 had not been met.
To address this concern, my attached appeal letter provides a summary of the course requirements of BCHM 315 (F24) and evidence that the requirements set out in Regulation 1.7.1.4 have in fact been met.
To summarize the detailed information provided, I completed the required number of quizzes, both midterms, and the final exam, and I received a passing grade, which is consistent with the conditions for credit standing under Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4. To read the Academic Regulation otherwise is procedurally unfair as I relied on the course syllabus to complete the required number of quizzes and I attended and completed both midterms and the final exam.
It is also important to note that, in my experience, final exam grades are not uploaded to OnQ, which may explain the discrepancy in the course records. As mentioned above, I would welcome the opportunity for the Board to confirm my attendance through official university exam logs which I signed or any other means that may be helpful.
In accordance with procedural fairness, the Associate Dean’s decision was required to take into account all of the relevant information and to apply the rules and regulations in a manner that afforded a fair process. I appreciate that the Associate Dean kindly acknowledged my circumstances and noted that the only deficiency was a technical one based on Regulation 1.7.1.4. I further appreciate the opportunity to clarify and to provide the included information so that either the Associate Dean can review this information and reconsider her decision or this appeal can be reviewed by the Board of Studies.
Please see the attached appeal letter which provides additional detail, evidence and argument.
Appeal Letter
Appeal Letter: To the Board of Studies,
I am so grateful for the time and care taken by the Associate Dean Academic, Dr. Naaman, and others in reviewing my petition for credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24). The decision, dated August 25, 2025, concluded that I was not eligible for credit standing due to the fact that my OnQ records showed that I did not complete all of the required components for BCHM 315 (F24) in accordance with Academic Appeal and Petition Regulation 1.7.1.4. I appreciate the opportunity to file this appeal to clarify that I have in fact completed all of the required components to satisfy Regulation 1.7.1.4.
I am therefore writing to appeal the Associate Dean’s decision regarding my petition for credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24) on the basis that the decision did not follow the rules of procedural fairness as the decision failed to follow university rules and regulations in a way that supported my right to a fair process, and that the decision was not a reasonable decision supported by the available evidence.
Background:
On August 25, 2025, I received a decision from Dr. Naaman that my request for credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24) was not granted due to a technical concern. Specifically, Dr. Naaman kindly acknowledged my circumstances, but noted that I was not eligible for credit standing due to the fact that my OnQ records showed that I had not completed all of the required components of the course.
When I responded to the Academic Petitions team, they responded as follows:
“Your onQ grades show Quiz #3 and the Final Exam as missing so it would be helpful if you could include a copy of the syllabus to show that one quiz wasn’t required, and proof that you wrote the final exam.”
I appreciate this guidance from the Academic Petitions team and will provide that missing material with this package to ensure that the decision in regard to my petition to receive credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24) is fairly reviewed and any decision meets the requirements of procedural fairness.
Quiz #3
The Associate Dean’s decision notes that my OnQ record showed one missing quiz (specifically Quiz #3). Due to my circumstances, as outlined in my petition, I was only able to complete 4 out of the 5 quizzes that were set in the course as one quiz (Quiz #3) timed out before I could complete it.
Based on the syllabus, it was my understanding that I had completed all of the course requirements as only 4 of the 5 quizzes were required. To assist, I have included a screen capture of the course syllabus as Attachment 1. As you will read, the 5 quizzes mentioned in the syllabus are subject to a footnote that states: “Only the top 4 out of 5 quiz marks will be used in the final grade calculation. The quizzes are designed to help you to assess your own understanding of concepts”. Further, the final paragraph only speaks to absences from “tests” and “exams”.
As I was unable to complete one of the quizzes during the time frame (further to my circumstances) I do not believe that I have missed a required component of the course. The syllabus confirmed that only 4 of the 5 quizzes were required to complete that component of the grade. Although I may not receive a potential advantage because of this, I want to point out that I was not missing a component. Further, Dr. Campbell provided an email to the class on November 22, 2024, included as Attachment 2, which clarified the grade breakdown. It notes that the mark includes 10% for the quizzes and this was consistent with the syllabus, which noted that 10% would be tabulated based on 4 out of 5 quizzes.
While it is true that I was unable to complete one quiz due to circumstances described in my petition, the course syllabus explicitly states that only the top 4 of 5 quizzes were required to tabulate that portion of my grade. It would therefore be unfair to conclude that I did not meet Regulation 1.7.1.4 as I completed all of the required quizzes as set out in the syllabus. Further, it is not clear that the Associate Dean had the benefit of reviewing the course syllabus and the associated email from the Professor, and, therefore, her decision may not have been based on all of the available evidence.
Final Exam
The decision also indicated that there was no record of me writing the final exam. I am baffled by this conclusion and do not understand how the University and/or the professor do not have a record of my writing this final exam and a copy of the exam that I completed. I can respectfully clarify that despite my circumstances, I did attend and write this exam, as I have all of my exams at Queen’s University. The exam took place on December 16, 2024 at 8:30am. I presented my student card, signed the attendance sheet, and complied with all exam procedures, including turning off my Garmin watch and phone. I do not have access to the exam attendance sheet that I signed but I would welcome the opportunity for the Associate Dean or the Board to review the official university exam logs to confirm my signature.
I then proceeded to complete the exam as is evidenced by my passing mark in the course. I do not have a copy of the exam as it was graded after the course was completed and would hope that the professor, Dr. Campbell, would have copies of all of the exams written and a record of the marks received.
Although it would not be in keeping with procedural fairness to request additional evidence from me that I attended and completed the exam, as I signed the sign-in sheet and completed the physical exam, I have also searched for other evidence to assist the Associate Dean and the Board on this point. I was able to review my personal records and, on the day of the exam, I exchanged text messages with my mother before and after the exam confirming that I had completed the exam and providing details regarding the exam. I then confirmed the same with two of my housemates and my aunts after the exam, again, confirming that I had completed it and providing details. I have included the relevant time-stamped portions of these texts in Attachment 3. I have redacted irrelevant portions of these communications as you do not need to know that I borrowed feta cheese from my housemate or that my aunts ordered sushi for dinner.
Based on the above, it would therefore be unfair to conclude that I did not meet Regulation 1.7.1.4 as I attended and completed the final exam. In addition to my statements here, there should be a physical record of my signature and a physical exam among the university’s exam records.
Further, based on the mark breakdown, a final exam weighted at 50% would have been necessary to obtain the passing mark which I obtained in this course. Again, it is not clear that the Associate Dean had the benefit of reviewing the exam sign-in sheet, my exam, my exam mark or the contemporaneous texts provided, and therefore her decision may not have been based on all of the available evidence.
Fairness and Reasonableness
As noted in the Associate Dean’s decision, she kindly acknowledged my circumstances but denied this petition for credit standing in BCMH 315 (F24) based on a concern that the requirements of Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4 had not been met.
To summarize the detailed information provided above, I completed the required number of quizzes, both midterms, and the final exam, and I received a passing grade, which is consistent with the conditions for credit standing under Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4. To read the Academic Regulation otherwise is procedurally unfair as I relied on the course syllabus to complete the required number of quizzes and I attended and completed all tests including the final exam.
A conclusion that I have not completed all course requirements and do not meet the requirements of Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4 would not meet the test of procedural fairness and would require an interpretation of Regulation 1.7.1.4 and the evidence available in a way that does not support my right to procedural fairness and would not be a reasonable decision based on all of the available evidence.
It is also important to note that, in my experience, final exam grades are not uploaded to OnQ, which may explain the discrepancy in the course records. As mentioned above I would welcome the opportunity for the Board to confirm my attendance through official university exam logs.
In accordance with procedural fairness, the Associate Dean’s decision was required to take into account all of the relevant information and to apply the rules and regulations in a manner that afforded a fair process. I appreciate that the Associate Dean kindly acknowledged my circumstances and noted that the only deficiency was a technical one based on Regulation 1.7.1.4. I also appreciate the opportunity to clarify and to provide the included information so that either the Associate Dean can review this additional information and reconsider her decision or this decision can be reviewed by the Board of Studies.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Alison Staples
I am so grateful for the time and care taken by the Associate Dean Academic, Dr. Naaman, and others in reviewing my petition for credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24). The decision, dated August 25, 2025, concluded that I was not eligible for credit standing due to the fact that my OnQ records showed that I did not complete all of the required components for BCHM 315 (F24) in accordance with Academic Appeal and Petition Regulation 1.7.1.4. I appreciate the opportunity to file this appeal to clarify that I have in fact completed all of the required components to satisfy Regulation 1.7.1.4.
I am therefore writing to appeal the Associate Dean’s decision regarding my petition for credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24) on the basis that the decision did not follow the rules of procedural fairness as the decision failed to follow university rules and regulations in a way that supported my right to a fair process, and that the decision was not a reasonable decision supported by the available evidence.
Background:
On August 25, 2025, I received a decision from Dr. Naaman that my request for credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24) was not granted due to a technical concern. Specifically, Dr. Naaman kindly acknowledged my circumstances, but noted that I was not eligible for credit standing due to the fact that my OnQ records showed that I had not completed all of the required components of the course.
When I responded to the Academic Petitions team, they responded as follows:
“Your onQ grades show Quiz #3 and the Final Exam as missing so it would be helpful if you could include a copy of the syllabus to show that one quiz wasn’t required, and proof that you wrote the final exam.”
I appreciate this guidance from the Academic Petitions team and will provide that missing material with this package to ensure that the decision in regard to my petition to receive credit standing in BCHM 315 (F24) is fairly reviewed and any decision meets the requirements of procedural fairness.
Quiz #3
The Associate Dean’s decision notes that my OnQ record showed one missing quiz (specifically Quiz #3). Due to my circumstances, as outlined in my petition, I was only able to complete 4 out of the 5 quizzes that were set in the course as one quiz (Quiz #3) timed out before I could complete it.
Based on the syllabus, it was my understanding that I had completed all of the course requirements as only 4 of the 5 quizzes were required. To assist, I have included a screen capture of the course syllabus as Attachment 1. As you will read, the 5 quizzes mentioned in the syllabus are subject to a footnote that states: “Only the top 4 out of 5 quiz marks will be used in the final grade calculation. The quizzes are designed to help you to assess your own understanding of concepts”. Further, the final paragraph only speaks to absences from “tests” and “exams”.
As I was unable to complete one of the quizzes during the time frame (further to my circumstances) I do not believe that I have missed a required component of the course. The syllabus confirmed that only 4 of the 5 quizzes were required to complete that component of the grade. Although I may not receive a potential advantage because of this, I want to point out that I was not missing a component. Further, Dr. Campbell provided an email to the class on November 22, 2024, included as Attachment 2, which clarified the grade breakdown. It notes that the mark includes 10% for the quizzes and this was consistent with the syllabus, which noted that 10% would be tabulated based on 4 out of 5 quizzes.
While it is true that I was unable to complete one quiz due to circumstances described in my petition, the course syllabus explicitly states that only the top 4 of 5 quizzes were required to tabulate that portion of my grade. It would therefore be unfair to conclude that I did not meet Regulation 1.7.1.4 as I completed all of the required quizzes as set out in the syllabus. Further, it is not clear that the Associate Dean had the benefit of reviewing the course syllabus and the associated email from the Professor, and, therefore, her decision may not have been based on all of the available evidence.
Final Exam
The decision also indicated that there was no record of me writing the final exam. I am baffled by this conclusion and do not understand how the University and/or the professor do not have a record of my writing this final exam and a copy of the exam that I completed. I can respectfully clarify that despite my circumstances, I did attend and write this exam, as I have all of my exams at Queen’s University. The exam took place on December 16, 2024 at 8:30am. I presented my student card, signed the attendance sheet, and complied with all exam procedures, including turning off my Garmin watch and phone. I do not have access to the exam attendance sheet that I signed but I would welcome the opportunity for the Associate Dean or the Board to review the official university exam logs to confirm my signature.
I then proceeded to complete the exam as is evidenced by my passing mark in the course. I do not have a copy of the exam as it was graded after the course was completed and would hope that the professor, Dr. Campbell, would have copies of all of the exams written and a record of the marks received.
Although it would not be in keeping with procedural fairness to request additional evidence from me that I attended and completed the exam, as I signed the sign-in sheet and completed the physical exam, I have also searched for other evidence to assist the Associate Dean and the Board on this point. I was able to review my personal records and, on the day of the exam, I exchanged text messages with my mother before and after the exam confirming that I had completed the exam and providing details regarding the exam. I then confirmed the same with two of my housemates and my aunts after the exam, again, confirming that I had completed it and providing details. I have included the relevant time-stamped portions of these texts in Attachment 3. I have redacted irrelevant portions of these communications as you do not need to know that I borrowed feta cheese from my housemate or that my aunts ordered sushi for dinner.
Based on the above, it would therefore be unfair to conclude that I did not meet Regulation 1.7.1.4 as I attended and completed the final exam. In addition to my statements here, there should be a physical record of my signature and a physical exam among the university’s exam records.
Further, based on the mark breakdown, a final exam weighted at 50% would have been necessary to obtain the passing mark which I obtained in this course. Again, it is not clear that the Associate Dean had the benefit of reviewing the exam sign-in sheet, my exam, my exam mark or the contemporaneous texts provided, and therefore her decision may not have been based on all of the available evidence.
Fairness and Reasonableness
As noted in the Associate Dean’s decision, she kindly acknowledged my circumstances but denied this petition for credit standing in BCMH 315 (F24) based on a concern that the requirements of Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4 had not been met.
To summarize the detailed information provided above, I completed the required number of quizzes, both midterms, and the final exam, and I received a passing grade, which is consistent with the conditions for credit standing under Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4. To read the Academic Regulation otherwise is procedurally unfair as I relied on the course syllabus to complete the required number of quizzes and I attended and completed all tests including the final exam.
A conclusion that I have not completed all course requirements and do not meet the requirements of Academic Regulation 1.7.1.4 would not meet the test of procedural fairness and would require an interpretation of Regulation 1.7.1.4 and the evidence available in a way that does not support my right to procedural fairness and would not be a reasonable decision based on all of the available evidence.
It is also important to note that, in my experience, final exam grades are not uploaded to OnQ, which may explain the discrepancy in the course records. As mentioned above I would welcome the opportunity for the Board to confirm my attendance through official university exam logs.
In accordance with procedural fairness, the Associate Dean’s decision was required to take into account all of the relevant information and to apply the rules and regulations in a manner that afforded a fair process. I appreciate that the Associate Dean kindly acknowledged my circumstances and noted that the only deficiency was a technical one based on Regulation 1.7.1.4. I also appreciate the opportunity to clarify and to provide the included information so that either the Associate Dean can review this additional information and reconsider her decision or this decision can be reviewed by the Board of Studies.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Alison Staples
Documentation
Document: Supporting Documents-1.pdf
History
Originally submitted May 19, 2025 at 5:44:52 PM.
| Field | Reference | Old Value | New Value | Note | User | Date/Time |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| status | N/A | Received | Incomplete | Kerri Andrews | 2025-07-08 10:40:21 AM | |
| status | N/A | Incomplete | In Review | Kerri Andrews | 2025-07-16 1:19:55 PM | |
| status | N/A | In Review | Partial Grant | Kerri Andrews | 2025-08-25 2:23:14 PM | |
| associate_dean | N/A | Dorit Naaman (Associate Dean Academic) | Kerri Andrews | 2025-08-25 2:23:14 PM | ||
| decision_letter | N/A | N/A | Decision letter sent | Kerri Andrews | 2025-08-25 2:23:53 PM | |
| new_appeal_level_2 | N/A | Level 2 | Level 2 Appeal ID: 340 | 21aps9 | 2025-08-26 4:57:05 PM | |
| status | N/A | Received | ADA Amended Decision | Kathrine Scott | 2025-09-10 3:08:41 PM |