Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 14248
Submitted: April 30, 2026 at 11:52:23 PM
First Name: Lingjie
Last Name: Kong
Pronoun: LK
Preferred Name: Jasmine
Student Number: 20260304
Email: 20lk21@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BSH
Plan: LISC
Level of Study: 4
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request an extension of an exam deferral
Code: BIOL 335
Term: Fall
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Request an extension of an exam deferral
Instructor's Name: Diane Tomalty
Section/Class Number: 5005
Component: Final Exam
Code: PHGY 215
Term: Fall
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Request an extension of an exam deferral
Instructor's Name: Ward Christopher
Section/Class Number: 5820
Component: Midterm Exam
Code: ANAT 315
Term: Fall
Year: 2025
Petition Category: Request an extension of an exam deferral
Instructor's Name: Diane Tomalty
Section/Class Number: 5005
Component: Final Exam
Level 1 Status
Status: DeniedLevel 2
Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 369
Submitted: June 3, 2026 at 7:08:58 AM
Relevant Petition: 14248
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Request an extension of an exam deferral: BIOL 335, Fall 2025 (Diane Tomalty): Final Exam
Request an extension of an exam deferral: PHGY 215, Fall 2025 (Ward Christopher): Midterm Exam
Request an extension of an exam deferral: ANAT 315, Fall 2025 (Diane Tomalty): Final Exam
Request an extension of an exam deferral: PHGY 215, Fall 2025 (Ward Christopher): Midterm Exam
Request an extension of an exam deferral: ANAT 315, Fall 2025 (Diane Tomalty): Final Exam
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: Dear Members of the Board of Studies,
I am writing to appeal the Associate Dean's decision to deny extensions of incomplete grades or deferred exams for ANAT 315, BIOL 335, and PHGY 215 from Fall 2025 on the grounds of unreasonable decision. Specifically, the decision failed to consider all relevant facts and did not draw adequate logical inferences from the evidence provided. These failures made the decision don't meet the standard for making reasonable decisions as defined by the principles of natural justice, which state that decisions must be made based on all relevant facts, logical inferences, and adequate reasoning.
Firstly, the decision inaccurately characterized my extenuating circumstances from Fall 2025 as a manageable chronic condition and treated my petitions as a routine remedy for academic difficulty, because both the actual situation and the professional medical documentation I have submitted don't support these characterizations. The medical record from my Chinese physician had confirmed that my mental health condition had stabilized over the Summer of 2025 and that I was in a relatively improved state at the very start of the Fall term. This means the relapse that occurred during Fall 2025 was not a predictable ongoing condition that could be managed by me, it was triggered by a specific and unexpected external event, the prolonged uncertainty surrounding my one-year withdrawal appeal that remained unresolved until more than half the semester had passed on November 5, 2025. It was the first time I had experienced such an important and extended appeal process, and it was not possible for me to predict the severe impact it would have on both my mental health and studies, especially as I was still in the early stages of recovery from my prior difficulties. The relapse was unexpected in both its cause and its severity, so it's not accurate to characterize it as a chronic condition I could have managed through existing accommodations.
It's also not accurate to view my petitions as a regular remedy for failing courses, because this characterization doesn't consider the fact that the outstanding assessments in the three courses represent the majority of the grade weight in each course. This means I am not seeking to recover from a poor academic record, most of the works from these courses has not yet been attempted. Although my mental health condition during the Fall term and the subsequent deferral period made it impossible to sit the exams and complete the assignments at the scheduled times. But it's easy to see from the grade records I have provided for the winter term, there is a reasonable basis to conclude that I have regained the full ability to completing these outstanding assessments in a great way. Denying that opportunity on the basis that these petitions are being used as regular remedy for failing courses does not reflect the full circumstance of my case.
Secondly, the decision did not adequately consider the effect of my extenuating circumstances lasting continuously across both the normal Fall term and the deferred exam period in January 2026. As documented by my physician, I should be considered to have lost the ability in completing outstanding works during both periods. I experienced the acute phase of my relapse and totally lost my ability to seek for help or deal with any school- related work from mid-September through December 2025, and only started seeking professional support while recovering when the Winter term began. This means that although the outstanding work had been rescheduled to the January deferred period, that make-up period still fallen during the transition between my acute phase and the very beginning of my recovery. It's unreasonable to expect a student to complete all outstanding work on time when her condition remained unstable and was just beginning to improve. A reasonable decision should carefully consider this kind of lasting effect rather than treating the normal term and the deferral period as separate and independent windows of assessment.
Based on these two failures, I respectfully ask the Board to reconsider the decision made for the three courses as I think a reasonable process would not denny a student the chance to complete her outstanding work when her current condition proved that she's fully capable of doing them well.
Sincerely,
Jasmine Kong
I am writing to appeal the Associate Dean's decision to deny extensions of incomplete grades or deferred exams for ANAT 315, BIOL 335, and PHGY 215 from Fall 2025 on the grounds of unreasonable decision. Specifically, the decision failed to consider all relevant facts and did not draw adequate logical inferences from the evidence provided. These failures made the decision don't meet the standard for making reasonable decisions as defined by the principles of natural justice, which state that decisions must be made based on all relevant facts, logical inferences, and adequate reasoning.
Firstly, the decision inaccurately characterized my extenuating circumstances from Fall 2025 as a manageable chronic condition and treated my petitions as a routine remedy for academic difficulty, because both the actual situation and the professional medical documentation I have submitted don't support these characterizations. The medical record from my Chinese physician had confirmed that my mental health condition had stabilized over the Summer of 2025 and that I was in a relatively improved state at the very start of the Fall term. This means the relapse that occurred during Fall 2025 was not a predictable ongoing condition that could be managed by me, it was triggered by a specific and unexpected external event, the prolonged uncertainty surrounding my one-year withdrawal appeal that remained unresolved until more than half the semester had passed on November 5, 2025. It was the first time I had experienced such an important and extended appeal process, and it was not possible for me to predict the severe impact it would have on both my mental health and studies, especially as I was still in the early stages of recovery from my prior difficulties. The relapse was unexpected in both its cause and its severity, so it's not accurate to characterize it as a chronic condition I could have managed through existing accommodations.
It's also not accurate to view my petitions as a regular remedy for failing courses, because this characterization doesn't consider the fact that the outstanding assessments in the three courses represent the majority of the grade weight in each course. This means I am not seeking to recover from a poor academic record, most of the works from these courses has not yet been attempted. Although my mental health condition during the Fall term and the subsequent deferral period made it impossible to sit the exams and complete the assignments at the scheduled times. But it's easy to see from the grade records I have provided for the winter term, there is a reasonable basis to conclude that I have regained the full ability to completing these outstanding assessments in a great way. Denying that opportunity on the basis that these petitions are being used as regular remedy for failing courses does not reflect the full circumstance of my case.
Secondly, the decision did not adequately consider the effect of my extenuating circumstances lasting continuously across both the normal Fall term and the deferred exam period in January 2026. As documented by my physician, I should be considered to have lost the ability in completing outstanding works during both periods. I experienced the acute phase of my relapse and totally lost my ability to seek for help or deal with any school- related work from mid-September through December 2025, and only started seeking professional support while recovering when the Winter term began. This means that although the outstanding work had been rescheduled to the January deferred period, that make-up period still fallen during the transition between my acute phase and the very beginning of my recovery. It's unreasonable to expect a student to complete all outstanding work on time when her condition remained unstable and was just beginning to improve. A reasonable decision should carefully consider this kind of lasting effect rather than treating the normal term and the deferral period as separate and independent windows of assessment.
Based on these two failures, I respectfully ask the Board to reconsider the decision made for the three courses as I think a reasonable process would not denny a student the chance to complete her outstanding work when her current condition proved that she's fully capable of doing them well.
Sincerely,
Jasmine Kong
Appeal Letter
Appeal Letter: Dear Members of the Board of Studies,
I would also like to address some specific points raised in the Associate Dean's decision.
Firstly, the decision characterized my Fall 2025 circumstances as a flare-up of a chronic extenuating condition. I want to respectfully clarify that this characterization does not accurately reflect the real situation supported by the medical documentation. The medical record from my Chinese physician has confirmed that my condition had stabilized over Summer 2025 and that I was in a relatively improved state at the very start of the Fall term. This means the relapse that occurred during Fall 2025 was not a predictable ongoing condition that I could have managed through existing accommodations, because It was actually triggered by an unexpected external event that I have never experienced before, the prolonged uncertainty surrounding my one-year withdrawal appeal. It was the first time I had experienced such an important and extended appeal process, so it was impossible for me to predict the severe impact it would carry later during my study period. Therefore, the characterization for that the relapse should be seen as a chronic condition manageable through services like QSAS accommodations does not reflect the actual and documented circumstances.
Secondly, the decision noted that the medical record has confirmed that I was supported professionally between January and April 2026 whenever an unexpected flare-up occurred, and used this as part of the basis for denying my petition. I want to respectfully point out that this reasoning does not accurately reflect the timeline that the medical record established as well. The record confirmed that I have lost the ability to seek help or engage with any school-related work from mid-September through December 2025, which means I only began rebuilding myself and seeking professional support when the Winter term started in January 2026, the same month that the outstanding exams were rescheduled. This means the critical window during which I needed be well enough to complete the outstanding work was actually September 2025 through mid-January 2026. The professional support I received between January and April 2026 therefore only began to take effect after the deferred exam window had already passed. Thus, the decision made based on the existence of that support does not engage with the fact that it arrived too late to have any support on my ability to complete the outstanding assessments. The decision failed to address the period during which I needed support the most.
Thirdly, the decision cited the regulation that students who have been unable to complete the majority of work in a course should consider dropping rather than seeking an extension, and applied this to deny my petition on the basis that the majority of work in each course remains incomplete. I sincerely ask the Board to reconsider this point based on the fact that the outstanding assessments in all three courses were never attempted due to my documented clinical mental health condition, rather than being work that was attempted and performed poorly on. In ANAT 315, the final lab exam (30%) and final written exam (30%) remain outstanding. In BIOL 335, two lab reports, the lab exam, and the final exam, together worth 80% remain outstanding. In PHGY 215, the midterm exam (40%) remains outstanding. These are assessments I was clinically prevented from sitting on time, not assessments I performed poorly on. The regulation's intent is to protect students and institutions from grade remediation of failed work, not designed to prevent a student from completing assessments she was unable to attempt due to severe and documented mental health condition. Denying my petition on this basis does not reflect the full circumstances of my case.
Fourthly, regarding the specific note in PHGY 215 that noted the learning outcomes would be unlikely to be met even with an additional deferral. I would respectfully ask the Board to consider this conclusion based on my Winter 2026 academic record. . The record clearly shows that I have regained the full ability to complete all types of academic work while maintaining a stable condition. Across PATH 310, BIOL 341, and BIOL 334, I completed every assignment and assessment on time, with scores ranging from 81% to 100% across all components. I am no longer the student whose performance was limited by a mental health issue, and I have confidence in my ability to meet course learning outcomes and complete all outstanding work to a gold standard.
I also fully understand the Associate Dean's broader point that the petition process should not substitute for proactive use of accommodations, and I accept this completely. I will continue to maintain contact with QSAS, Student Wellness, and Student Support just like what I have done since January 2026. I promise that I will always remember the proactive use of available accommodations whenever I need support.
I respectfully and sincerely ask the Board to grant the appeal for extensions of incomplete grades or exam deferral opportunities for the three courses, my current study condition will never let you down. All I ask is only an opportunity to apply that ability to the work that remains.
Sincerely,
Jasmine Kong
I would also like to address some specific points raised in the Associate Dean's decision.
Firstly, the decision characterized my Fall 2025 circumstances as a flare-up of a chronic extenuating condition. I want to respectfully clarify that this characterization does not accurately reflect the real situation supported by the medical documentation. The medical record from my Chinese physician has confirmed that my condition had stabilized over Summer 2025 and that I was in a relatively improved state at the very start of the Fall term. This means the relapse that occurred during Fall 2025 was not a predictable ongoing condition that I could have managed through existing accommodations, because It was actually triggered by an unexpected external event that I have never experienced before, the prolonged uncertainty surrounding my one-year withdrawal appeal. It was the first time I had experienced such an important and extended appeal process, so it was impossible for me to predict the severe impact it would carry later during my study period. Therefore, the characterization for that the relapse should be seen as a chronic condition manageable through services like QSAS accommodations does not reflect the actual and documented circumstances.
Secondly, the decision noted that the medical record has confirmed that I was supported professionally between January and April 2026 whenever an unexpected flare-up occurred, and used this as part of the basis for denying my petition. I want to respectfully point out that this reasoning does not accurately reflect the timeline that the medical record established as well. The record confirmed that I have lost the ability to seek help or engage with any school-related work from mid-September through December 2025, which means I only began rebuilding myself and seeking professional support when the Winter term started in January 2026, the same month that the outstanding exams were rescheduled. This means the critical window during which I needed be well enough to complete the outstanding work was actually September 2025 through mid-January 2026. The professional support I received between January and April 2026 therefore only began to take effect after the deferred exam window had already passed. Thus, the decision made based on the existence of that support does not engage with the fact that it arrived too late to have any support on my ability to complete the outstanding assessments. The decision failed to address the period during which I needed support the most.
Thirdly, the decision cited the regulation that students who have been unable to complete the majority of work in a course should consider dropping rather than seeking an extension, and applied this to deny my petition on the basis that the majority of work in each course remains incomplete. I sincerely ask the Board to reconsider this point based on the fact that the outstanding assessments in all three courses were never attempted due to my documented clinical mental health condition, rather than being work that was attempted and performed poorly on. In ANAT 315, the final lab exam (30%) and final written exam (30%) remain outstanding. In BIOL 335, two lab reports, the lab exam, and the final exam, together worth 80% remain outstanding. In PHGY 215, the midterm exam (40%) remains outstanding. These are assessments I was clinically prevented from sitting on time, not assessments I performed poorly on. The regulation's intent is to protect students and institutions from grade remediation of failed work, not designed to prevent a student from completing assessments she was unable to attempt due to severe and documented mental health condition. Denying my petition on this basis does not reflect the full circumstances of my case.
Fourthly, regarding the specific note in PHGY 215 that noted the learning outcomes would be unlikely to be met even with an additional deferral. I would respectfully ask the Board to consider this conclusion based on my Winter 2026 academic record. . The record clearly shows that I have regained the full ability to complete all types of academic work while maintaining a stable condition. Across PATH 310, BIOL 341, and BIOL 334, I completed every assignment and assessment on time, with scores ranging from 81% to 100% across all components. I am no longer the student whose performance was limited by a mental health issue, and I have confidence in my ability to meet course learning outcomes and complete all outstanding work to a gold standard.
I also fully understand the Associate Dean's broader point that the petition process should not substitute for proactive use of accommodations, and I accept this completely. I will continue to maintain contact with QSAS, Student Wellness, and Student Support just like what I have done since January 2026. I promise that I will always remember the proactive use of available accommodations whenever I need support.
I respectfully and sincerely ask the Board to grant the appeal for extensions of incomplete grades or exam deferral opportunities for the three courses, my current study condition will never let you down. All I ask is only an opportunity to apply that ability to the work that remains.
Sincerely,
Jasmine Kong