Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Petition Letter: Dear Associate Dean (Academic):

I am appealing the grades of my first two Winter lab reports. In the Enthalpy of Neutralization Lab, I was deducted 1 mark for calculation errors in the questions section.. However, the lab TA did not point out any calculation errors in my report, and the report rubric says that all of my questions were done perfectly and that I received 3/3.

I was also deducted 1 mark for the overall presentation of the report, because I did not upload the lab report template from OnQ. Contrary to what the lab TA claims, I did upload and use the lab report template from OnQ located at this link,
https://onq.queensu.ca/d2l/le/content/559656/viewContent/3243961/View

For these reasons I am asking for my grade to be updated from 17/20 to 19/20.


In the Solubility Equilibrium lab, I was deducted 1 mark for not including all relevant equations and not defining all variables in the Introduction part of the lab report. However,

1. I did discuss the reaction of potassium chloride with its ions as an example of solubility equilibrium in the Introduction part.
2. I also included 4 reactions in a table in another part of the report, and thus there was no need to include them again in another part of the report. I was instructed in the Fall by my previous TA that I did not have to duplicate my answers in different parts of the report.
3. The lab instructions for the Introduction part only say Write a brief introduction explaining the concept of equilibrium with respect to solubility, which I completely did. There was no mention of including any equations or formulas, yet I did still discuss one equation.
4. My colleague did not even include a single equation in his Introduction part and got 20/20 by his TA.

I was deducted 1 mark for a question because I was expected to discuss the relationship between Ksp and Qsp. However,
1. The question only asked to Explain in terms of ion concentrations and Ksp why a precipitate forms for some solutions. The question never mentioned Qsp, which we hadn't studied in lecture at the time of the lab.
2. I did explain the relationship between Ksp and its ion concentrations which is what the question asked for.
3. I did discuss the relationship between Ksp and its ion concentrations when they are bigger, which does cover Qsp even if Qsp was not explicitly mentioned.
4. My colleague did not mention Qsp at all in his answer and got 20/20 by his TA.

I lost 1 mark because I did not include a sentence or two about why I chose one cation/anion over another. However,

1. I chose the correct cation/anion, which was acknowledged by the TA in the lab report. There was no question asking for explanations about choosing the unknown cation/anion. There wasn't even a space for that in the lab report, confirming that an explanation in this case was not required. This is because it was so obvious from the lab report why these were the right cation and anion.
2. We were only required to fill in the tables. I included all relevant observations that were mentioned by the lab coordinator in the lab video,
https://onq.queensu.ca/d2l/le/content/559656/viewContent/3243949/View
3. None of my colleagues included any explanations. They just filled in the tables just as the lab coordinator did, and they got 20/20 by their TAs.

For these reasons I am asking for my lab grade to be updated from 17/20 to 20/20.


My lab TA hasn??t responded to my follow-up complaints and refuses to take any feedback into account at all, and just says that she stands by the marking and the grade she gave me. Thus, she will not objectively review my reports and therefore I am asking for two other reviewers to review my reports.

Thank you so much for your time and consideration.