Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 4063
Submitted: December 24, 2017 at 1:23:00 AM
First Name: joseph
Last Name: palubiski
Student Number: 10126790
Email: j.palubiski@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BAH
Plan: APEC
Level of Study: 4
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Code: LLCU 209
Term: Fall
Year: 2017
Petition Category: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Instructor's Name: Mr. Karl Hardy
Component: Final Essay
Petition Letter
Petition Letter: To whom it may concern,
I am appealing my grade for the final essay for LLCU 209, taught by Karl Hardy.
Grounds for Appeal:
1. In the comments on the final paper, Hardy stated that my thesis statement was 'ungrammatical'. However, I have asked multiple people to read over the sentence, including two professors, and no one has found that it is ungrammatical. This sentence is highlighted in my marked paper, which is included in the appeal.
2. Hardy commented twice on what he thought to be incorrect citation. However, in my attached midterm paper for the course, I used the same citation method, with no comment from the marker, which lead me to believe it was an acceptable format for this course.
3. Hardy stated that the tables I included in my paper were 'unnecessary', but provided no further explanation as to why they were unnecessary. I performed economic analysis based directly off of the figures shown in the tables, and were intended to assist the reader in understanding the economic analysis. With no explanation as to why they were unnecessary, and economic analysis in my paper based directly off of them, I believe it is unfair to suggest that they aren't necessary.
4. Hardy reformatted components of my paper, yet nowhere on the assignment page on OnQ does it state the requirements for formatting that would suggest what I had done was incorrect.
5. Hardy's recurring comments through our emails were that my paper was 'significantly' short of the 10 page word count. My paper was 9 pages long. This is not 'significant' in my eyes, and I believe that this is the largest reason my grade was so low. It was suggested that my essay being one page short of the word count rendered it 'incomplete'. This suggests that page count is more important than the quality of the work, as my essay was absolutely complete.
6. Hardy stated that there was 'no thesis to be found', however, I clearly signposted where my evaluation of the work would be, and explained what I planned on exploring further.
I trust this is enough to consider an appeal, and I have attached all of the supporting documentation. Furthermore, in the literature provided in the email there was a section regarding who reviews the material. The tone of professor Hardy's emails and him referring to my essay as 'incomplete', among other things, makes me very uncomfortable with the idea of him being one of the two people responsible for reviewing the grade. I strongly feel it would affect this review negatively if he were to be one of the two people reviewing my appeal. I would greatly appreciate if it were to be considered to not have him on the panel.
I look forward to hearing from you, and thank you for taking the time to review my paper.
Best,
Joe Palubiski
I am appealing my grade for the final essay for LLCU 209, taught by Karl Hardy.
Grounds for Appeal:
1. In the comments on the final paper, Hardy stated that my thesis statement was 'ungrammatical'. However, I have asked multiple people to read over the sentence, including two professors, and no one has found that it is ungrammatical. This sentence is highlighted in my marked paper, which is included in the appeal.
2. Hardy commented twice on what he thought to be incorrect citation. However, in my attached midterm paper for the course, I used the same citation method, with no comment from the marker, which lead me to believe it was an acceptable format for this course.
3. Hardy stated that the tables I included in my paper were 'unnecessary', but provided no further explanation as to why they were unnecessary. I performed economic analysis based directly off of the figures shown in the tables, and were intended to assist the reader in understanding the economic analysis. With no explanation as to why they were unnecessary, and economic analysis in my paper based directly off of them, I believe it is unfair to suggest that they aren't necessary.
4. Hardy reformatted components of my paper, yet nowhere on the assignment page on OnQ does it state the requirements for formatting that would suggest what I had done was incorrect.
5. Hardy's recurring comments through our emails were that my paper was 'significantly' short of the 10 page word count. My paper was 9 pages long. This is not 'significant' in my eyes, and I believe that this is the largest reason my grade was so low. It was suggested that my essay being one page short of the word count rendered it 'incomplete'. This suggests that page count is more important than the quality of the work, as my essay was absolutely complete.
6. Hardy stated that there was 'no thesis to be found', however, I clearly signposted where my evaluation of the work would be, and explained what I planned on exploring further.
I trust this is enough to consider an appeal, and I have attached all of the supporting documentation. Furthermore, in the literature provided in the email there was a section regarding who reviews the material. The tone of professor Hardy's emails and him referring to my essay as 'incomplete', among other things, makes me very uncomfortable with the idea of him being one of the two people responsible for reviewing the grade. I strongly feel it would affect this review negatively if he were to be one of the two people reviewing my appeal. I would greatly appreciate if it were to be considered to not have him on the panel.
I look forward to hearing from you, and thank you for taking the time to review my paper.
Best,
Joe Palubiski
Documentation
Professional Letter: Palubiski 17.docx
Professional Letter Detail: Comments on final paper
Document: joe.docx
Documentation Detail: comments on Midterm essay