Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 4556
Submitted: May 14, 2018 at 12:00:37 PM
First Name: Yuxiao
Last Name: Li
Student Number: 10126209
Email: 13yl56@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BAH
Plan: ECON
Level of Study: 4
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Code: ECON 443
Term: Winter
Year: 2018
Petition Category: Request a review of instructors' decisions on grading of final examination and/or term work
Instructor's Name: Devon Garvie
Component: Midterm, assignment and final exam
Petition Letter
Petition Letter: The Associate Dean of Studies:
Dr. Bénard,
I hope you well. I am writing this letter to appeal for regrading my ECON 443 final exam. The reasons that I ask for reconsideration are listed below.
1. Instructor¿¿s Hostility to feedback/concerns and intimidation:
During the semester, I once stated my thoughts on the irrelevance between study problem sets and the midterm exam to the instructor. However, the instructor aggressively objected my idea and phrased that as a student ¿you should have never commented in this way.¿¿ The instructor¿¿s response intimidated me and I strongly sense my critical comment on the usefulness of the study problem sets irritated the instructor. As such, I doubt about the fairness in my final exam marking.
Additionally, the instructor has been steadfast in her refusal to provide full and complete exam preparatory materials to me. These preparatory materials are notably lacking in the areas of midterm and assignment answer sheets, as well as study problem solution sets. This is compounded by the fact that the instructor refuses to provide answer keys for the midterm or the assignment, meaning that I have no way to learn from my mistakes and rectify those errors. It has been reiterated to us that the readings should suffice in answering such questions, but the readings provided bear little notational comparability to the in-class notes. Although she has provided some solution sets for the course¿¿s pre-midterm material, I was largely left to fend for myself when it comes to approximating solutions for the course¿¿s more advanced topics. This is a significant problem so that I question about the rubrics in grading the final exams.
2. The response has potentially been under evaluated substantially in the essay answer:
The instructor noted that many of the students in the class exhibited poor handwriting that was near ¿¿illegible¿. For a class where students are virtually completely reliant on in-class notetaking, and where the professor displays disorganized and mistake-rife derivation examples, it is inevitable that student performance becomes unfairly dependent on their penmanship (in note-taking) and ability to weed-out instructor mistakes. From the notes on my assignment grading, I am afraid that the professor could not quite recognize some of my handwritings.
3. Instructor¿¿s general unavailability and favouritism
The lecturer is very unresponsive to emails requesting appointments. This was especially problematic given that she does not post/hold official office hours, and so when I required assistance/clarification regarding course material often find the professor was unreachable. As two examples, the instructor failed to respond to emails requesting in-person appointments to consult her on the primary course assignment in the days leading up to the due date. Also, the instructor failed to reply three emails asking for questions regarding to the final exam and two inquiry for appointment booking in person after class. Such instances of unavailability contrast with some particular student¿¿s appraisal that the instructor had been readily available for consultation outside of class. Relatively early in the semester many students perceived a pre-existing acquaintance between the instructor and this student, and I felt that she has played ¿¿favourites¿ when it comes to scheduling appointments as well as considering feedback.
Also, the class does not explicitly require prerequisite courses to allow enrollment but students in the class whom have completed the instructor¿¿s lower-level climate change related classes have faced a significantly flatter learning curve during this course. This issue could be mitigated if some of the delivery method issues (outlined above) were to be addressed, but I nonetheless feel that it is unfair for the prospective graduates to learn of such a substantial learning disadvantage (in the form of lacking prerequisite knowledge) weeks into a final semester class. From discussion, it seems that the highest performers of the class also happen to be students which have taken two or more of the instructor¿¿s lower-level classes.
Because I proposed critical comment and personal thought to the instructor before, I am certainly not the instructor¿¿s preference and that might have led to a different marking rubric on my exam.
4. Unclear and changing examination expectations:
The exam expectations have been unclear and rapidly changing. In the instructor¿¿s final review session, two days before the final exam, she spent 1/3 of the 90-minute session attempting to derive a solution for a practice problem, ultimately failing to derive a solution herself and only to finally surrender and decide this particular content would no longer be covered. Moreover, the instructor has misled me to focus more on the midterm rather than the assignment format. The actual final turned out that the exam format was in reverse; more similar to the study problem sets rather than the mid-term question formats. Based on my unpleasant personal experience with the instructor, I question whether the misleading was in purpose to fail me on the exam.
Summary:
I appeal for the re-read of my ECON 443 final exam because the I felt that the mark I was given for this course was not evaluated fully on my understanding for the course materials nor for my ability to study. The grade might show, in an objective answer, that a correct answer has been counted as incorrect; or show, in a subjective or essay answer, that the response has been under evaluated substantially. If possible, I am willing to provide documentation, such as class notes, study problem sets and the assignment to support my appeal.
Thanks for your consideration. I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Juliet Yuxiao Li
Student : 10126209
Dr. Bénard,
I hope you well. I am writing this letter to appeal for regrading my ECON 443 final exam. The reasons that I ask for reconsideration are listed below.
1. Instructor¿¿s Hostility to feedback/concerns and intimidation:
During the semester, I once stated my thoughts on the irrelevance between study problem sets and the midterm exam to the instructor. However, the instructor aggressively objected my idea and phrased that as a student ¿you should have never commented in this way.¿¿ The instructor¿¿s response intimidated me and I strongly sense my critical comment on the usefulness of the study problem sets irritated the instructor. As such, I doubt about the fairness in my final exam marking.
Additionally, the instructor has been steadfast in her refusal to provide full and complete exam preparatory materials to me. These preparatory materials are notably lacking in the areas of midterm and assignment answer sheets, as well as study problem solution sets. This is compounded by the fact that the instructor refuses to provide answer keys for the midterm or the assignment, meaning that I have no way to learn from my mistakes and rectify those errors. It has been reiterated to us that the readings should suffice in answering such questions, but the readings provided bear little notational comparability to the in-class notes. Although she has provided some solution sets for the course¿¿s pre-midterm material, I was largely left to fend for myself when it comes to approximating solutions for the course¿¿s more advanced topics. This is a significant problem so that I question about the rubrics in grading the final exams.
2. The response has potentially been under evaluated substantially in the essay answer:
The instructor noted that many of the students in the class exhibited poor handwriting that was near ¿¿illegible¿. For a class where students are virtually completely reliant on in-class notetaking, and where the professor displays disorganized and mistake-rife derivation examples, it is inevitable that student performance becomes unfairly dependent on their penmanship (in note-taking) and ability to weed-out instructor mistakes. From the notes on my assignment grading, I am afraid that the professor could not quite recognize some of my handwritings.
3. Instructor¿¿s general unavailability and favouritism
The lecturer is very unresponsive to emails requesting appointments. This was especially problematic given that she does not post/hold official office hours, and so when I required assistance/clarification regarding course material often find the professor was unreachable. As two examples, the instructor failed to respond to emails requesting in-person appointments to consult her on the primary course assignment in the days leading up to the due date. Also, the instructor failed to reply three emails asking for questions regarding to the final exam and two inquiry for appointment booking in person after class. Such instances of unavailability contrast with some particular student¿¿s appraisal that the instructor had been readily available for consultation outside of class. Relatively early in the semester many students perceived a pre-existing acquaintance between the instructor and this student, and I felt that she has played ¿¿favourites¿ when it comes to scheduling appointments as well as considering feedback.
Also, the class does not explicitly require prerequisite courses to allow enrollment but students in the class whom have completed the instructor¿¿s lower-level climate change related classes have faced a significantly flatter learning curve during this course. This issue could be mitigated if some of the delivery method issues (outlined above) were to be addressed, but I nonetheless feel that it is unfair for the prospective graduates to learn of such a substantial learning disadvantage (in the form of lacking prerequisite knowledge) weeks into a final semester class. From discussion, it seems that the highest performers of the class also happen to be students which have taken two or more of the instructor¿¿s lower-level classes.
Because I proposed critical comment and personal thought to the instructor before, I am certainly not the instructor¿¿s preference and that might have led to a different marking rubric on my exam.
4. Unclear and changing examination expectations:
The exam expectations have been unclear and rapidly changing. In the instructor¿¿s final review session, two days before the final exam, she spent 1/3 of the 90-minute session attempting to derive a solution for a practice problem, ultimately failing to derive a solution herself and only to finally surrender and decide this particular content would no longer be covered. Moreover, the instructor has misled me to focus more on the midterm rather than the assignment format. The actual final turned out that the exam format was in reverse; more similar to the study problem sets rather than the mid-term question formats. Based on my unpleasant personal experience with the instructor, I question whether the misleading was in purpose to fail me on the exam.
Summary:
I appeal for the re-read of my ECON 443 final exam because the I felt that the mark I was given for this course was not evaluated fully on my understanding for the course materials nor for my ability to study. The grade might show, in an objective answer, that a correct answer has been counted as incorrect; or show, in a subjective or essay answer, that the response has been under evaluated substantially. If possible, I am willing to provide documentation, such as class notes, study problem sets and the assignment to support my appeal.
Thanks for your consideration. I am looking forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Juliet Yuxiao Li
Student : 10126209