Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 14315
Submitted: May 13, 2026 at 9:51:49 AM
First Name: Adison
Last Name: Emery
Pronoun: She/her
Preferred Name: Adison
Student Number: 20519557
Email: memery@hpedsb.on.ca
Degree Program: BA
Plan: SOCI
Level of Study: 1
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request aegrotat (AG) standing in a course or courses
Code: ENGL 112
Term: Winter
Year: 2026
Petition Category: Request aegrotat (AG) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Gabrielle McIntire
Section/Class Number: W26
Level 1 Status
Status: DeniedLevel 2
Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 381
Submitted: July 29, 2026 at 8:04:07 AM
Relevant Petition: 14315
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Request aegrotat (AG) standing in a course or courses: ENGL 112, Winter 2026 (Gabrielle McIntire)
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: Pursuant to Academic Appeal and Petition Regulations, this appeal to the Board of Studies is brought on the grounds of Procedural Unfairness and an Unreasonable Decision regarding Submission #14315 (ENGL 112).
The decision is procedurally unfair and unreasonable on three key counts:
It faults a student registered with Queen's Student Accessibility Services (QSAS) for sporadic attendance while explicitly admitting that the instructor failed to respond to the student's early-term accommodation notice regarding absences.
It treats the instructor's passive
The decision is procedurally unfair and unreasonable on three key counts:
It faults a student registered with Queen's Student Accessibility Services (QSAS) for sporadic attendance while explicitly admitting that the instructor failed to respond to the student's early-term accommodation notice regarding absences.
It treats the instructor's passive
Appeal Letter
Appeal Letter: To: The Board of Studies, Faculty of Arts and Science, Queen’s University (asc.appeals@queensu.ca)
Appellant: Adison Emery
Student ID: 20519557
Student Email: memery@hpedsb.on.ca
Course: ENGL 112 (Winter 2026)
Decision Appealed: Associate Dean Dorit Naaman’s Decision (Submission #14315, Dated July 27, 2026)
I. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
This appeal is submitted to the Board of Studies requesting a review of the decision rendered by Associate Dean Dorit Naaman on July 27, 2026 (Submission #14315). This appeal is brought pursuant to Faculty regulations on two primary grounds:
Procedural Unfairness & Failure to Apply Accommodations Policy: The decision fails to properly enforce Queen’s Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Policy by holding the student accountable for a lack of formal accommodation structures when the instructor admittedly failed to respond to the student's accommodation notice regarding absences.
Unreasonable and Contradictory Findings: The ruling contains logically inconsistent findings regarding whether essential course learning outcomes were met, given the concurrent finding that a single 5% assessment would allow a passing grade.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Registration & Early Notice: I am registered with Queen's Student Accessibility Services (QSAS). As acknowledged in the Associate Dean’s letter, I proactively emailed Instructor Gabrielle McIntire in January 2026 to provide notice of my QSAS status and request accommodations regarding class absences and in-class presentations (worth 30% combined).
Instructor’s Unanswered Communication: The decision explicitly states:
Appellant: Adison Emery
Student ID: 20519557
Student Email: memery@hpedsb.on.ca
Course: ENGL 112 (Winter 2026)
Decision Appealed: Associate Dean Dorit Naaman’s Decision (Submission #14315, Dated July 27, 2026)
I. GROUNDS FOR APPEAL
This appeal is submitted to the Board of Studies requesting a review of the decision rendered by Associate Dean Dorit Naaman on July 27, 2026 (Submission #14315). This appeal is brought pursuant to Faculty regulations on two primary grounds:
Procedural Unfairness & Failure to Apply Accommodations Policy: The decision fails to properly enforce Queen’s Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Policy by holding the student accountable for a lack of formal accommodation structures when the instructor admittedly failed to respond to the student's accommodation notice regarding absences.
Unreasonable and Contradictory Findings: The ruling contains logically inconsistent findings regarding whether essential course learning outcomes were met, given the concurrent finding that a single 5% assessment would allow a passing grade.
II. STATEMENT OF FACTS
Registration & Early Notice: I am registered with Queen's Student Accessibility Services (QSAS). As acknowledged in the Associate Dean’s letter, I proactively emailed Instructor Gabrielle McIntire in January 2026 to provide notice of my QSAS status and request accommodations regarding class absences and in-class presentations (worth 30% combined).
Instructor’s Unanswered Communication: The decision explicitly states: