Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 14196
Submitted: April 21, 2026 at 11:07:59 PM
First Name: Geneva
Last Name: Cho
Pronoun: She/Her
Preferred Name: Gigi
Student Number: 20462882
Email: 23qyb4@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BA
Plan: GPHY
Level of Study: 2
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Code: ASTR 101
Term: Winter
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: David Hanes
Code: SOCY 122
Term: Fall/Winter
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Katie Coleman
Code: RELS 131
Term: Fall/Winter
Year: 2025
Instructor's Name: Danielle LaGrone
Level 1 Status
Status: Partial GrantLevel 2
Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 367
Submitted: May 24, 2026 at 5:10:24 PM
Relevant Petition: 14196
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: SOCY 122, Fall/Winter 2025 (Katie Coleman)
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 grounds that the Associate Dean’s decision did not fully support my right to a fair process and was not fully reasonable in light of the evidence and documented extenuating circumstances presented in my petition.
While the decision did acknowledge the significant impact of my mental health difficulties during the relevant academic period, I believe more consideration was given to the extent to which those circumstances directly impaired my ability to complete and submit coursework in SOCY 122.
The denial relied primarily on the fact that several course components were incomplete. However, my documented psychological circumstances were not limited to reduced academic performance; they substantially impaired my functioning, motivation, decision-making, and ability to submit work. At times, I partially completed assessments but experienced severe depressive symptoms and feelings of inadequacy that prevented submission. The decision placed disproportionate emphasis on the technical incompletion of assignments without fully considering the documented reasons that caused that incompletion.
I am also appealing on the basis that fairness and equitable consideration require meaningful assessment of how severe mental health circumstances affect a student’s ability to meet academic requirements. In my case, the same extenuating circumstances that negatively affected my academic performance also directly contributed to the missing course components.
For these reasons, I respectfully submit that the decision may have applied the Credit Standing regulation too narrowly and without sufficient weight given to the full impact of my documented circumstances.
While the decision did acknowledge the significant impact of my mental health difficulties during the relevant academic period, I believe more consideration was given to the extent to which those circumstances directly impaired my ability to complete and submit coursework in SOCY 122.
The denial relied primarily on the fact that several course components were incomplete. However, my documented psychological circumstances were not limited to reduced academic performance; they substantially impaired my functioning, motivation, decision-making, and ability to submit work. At times, I partially completed assessments but experienced severe depressive symptoms and feelings of inadequacy that prevented submission. The decision placed disproportionate emphasis on the technical incompletion of assignments without fully considering the documented reasons that caused that incompletion.
I am also appealing on the basis that fairness and equitable consideration require meaningful assessment of how severe mental health circumstances affect a student’s ability to meet academic requirements. In my case, the same extenuating circumstances that negatively affected my academic performance also directly contributed to the missing course components.
For these reasons, I respectfully submit that the decision may have applied the Credit Standing regulation too narrowly and without sufficient weight given to the full impact of my documented circumstances.
Appeal Letter
Appeal Letter: Dear Members of the Board of Studies,
I am appealing the Associate Dean’s decision to deny my request for Credit Standing in SOCY 122 (FW24/25) on the grounds that the decision was not fully reasonable in light of the severity and impact of my documented extenuating circumstances.
In the decision letter, the Associate Dean acknowledged my documented mental health difficulties and recognized that these circumstances substantially affected my academic performance between October 31, 2024 and May 1, 2025. However, my request for Credit Standing in SOCY 122 was denied because not all graded components of the course were completed, specifically the Library Quiz, Research Paper Outline, and Research Paper.
I understand that Regulation 1.7.1.4 states that Credit Standing is normally reserved for students who completed all course requirements. However, I respectfully submit that the decision did not fully account for the nature and severity of the psychological circumstances that prevented me from completing and submitting work during this period.
During the Fall/Winter 2024 to 2025 academic year, I was experiencing depression and significant deterioration in my mental health. My condition affected not only my academic performance, but also my ability to function, make decisions, and engage normally with coursework. At times, I completed portions of assignments or attempted to work on them, but I became overwhelmed by feelings of hopelessness, inadequacy, and paralysis regarding my academic abilities. There were occasions where I struggled to submit completed or partially completed work because I genuinely believed I was incapable of succeeding and felt mentally unable to move forward.
These were not ordinary issues of time management or lack of effort. My mental health condition substantially impaired my ability to complete academic tasks and participate consistently in the course. The documentation already provided confirms both the timing and academic impact of these circumstances.
I also respectfully ask the Board to consider the principles of fairness and equitable consideration referenced throughout the Academic Petitions and Appeals Regulations and the Ombudsperson’s guidance. The Ombudsperson notes that fairness does not always mean treating every student identically, particularly where significant individual circumstances are involved. In my case, the same mental health condition that lowered my academic performance also directly prevented completion and submission of coursework. I believe the decision placed primary emphasis on the technical incompletion of assignments without fully weighing the documented psychological barriers that caused that incompletion.
I am not disputing that the Associate Dean applied the regulation as written. Rather, I am appealing on the basis that the decision may have applied the regulation too narrowly without sufficient consideration of the exceptional circumstances involved and the extent to which my mental health impaired my ability to complete the remaining course requirements.
Since this period, I have been actively working toward improving and managing my mental health and seeking appropriate support so that I can better manage future academic responsibilities. I remain committed to my education and to developing strategies that will allow me to succeed moving forward. This can all be reflected in my second year GPA, which shows my true academic ability.
Thank you for your time and consideration of my appeal.
Sincerely,
Geneva Cho.
I am appealing the Associate Dean’s decision to deny my request for Credit Standing in SOCY 122 (FW24/25) on the grounds that the decision was not fully reasonable in light of the severity and impact of my documented extenuating circumstances.
In the decision letter, the Associate Dean acknowledged my documented mental health difficulties and recognized that these circumstances substantially affected my academic performance between October 31, 2024 and May 1, 2025. However, my request for Credit Standing in SOCY 122 was denied because not all graded components of the course were completed, specifically the Library Quiz, Research Paper Outline, and Research Paper.
I understand that Regulation 1.7.1.4 states that Credit Standing is normally reserved for students who completed all course requirements. However, I respectfully submit that the decision did not fully account for the nature and severity of the psychological circumstances that prevented me from completing and submitting work during this period.
During the Fall/Winter 2024 to 2025 academic year, I was experiencing depression and significant deterioration in my mental health. My condition affected not only my academic performance, but also my ability to function, make decisions, and engage normally with coursework. At times, I completed portions of assignments or attempted to work on them, but I became overwhelmed by feelings of hopelessness, inadequacy, and paralysis regarding my academic abilities. There were occasions where I struggled to submit completed or partially completed work because I genuinely believed I was incapable of succeeding and felt mentally unable to move forward.
These were not ordinary issues of time management or lack of effort. My mental health condition substantially impaired my ability to complete academic tasks and participate consistently in the course. The documentation already provided confirms both the timing and academic impact of these circumstances.
I also respectfully ask the Board to consider the principles of fairness and equitable consideration referenced throughout the Academic Petitions and Appeals Regulations and the Ombudsperson’s guidance. The Ombudsperson notes that fairness does not always mean treating every student identically, particularly where significant individual circumstances are involved. In my case, the same mental health condition that lowered my academic performance also directly prevented completion and submission of coursework. I believe the decision placed primary emphasis on the technical incompletion of assignments without fully weighing the documented psychological barriers that caused that incompletion.
I am not disputing that the Associate Dean applied the regulation as written. Rather, I am appealing on the basis that the decision may have applied the regulation too narrowly without sufficient consideration of the exceptional circumstances involved and the extent to which my mental health impaired my ability to complete the remaining course requirements.
Since this period, I have been actively working toward improving and managing my mental health and seeking appropriate support so that I can better manage future academic responsibilities. I remain committed to my education and to developing strategies that will allow me to succeed moving forward. This can all be reflected in my second year GPA, which shows my true academic ability.
Thank you for your time and consideration of my appeal.
Sincerely,
Geneva Cho.