Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Petition Letter: Dear Dr. Atkinson,
My name is Emily Mason; I have just completed my final semester at Queen??s studying Biochemistry and Health Studies. I am writing to you today to request a review of my instructor??s decision on the grading of my participation (term work) during my LISC 595 (6.0 units) project course. I have pursued an informal review with Dr. Sheela Abraham, my supervisor for this course, however unfortunately, I do not feel our discourse has been productive. I appreciate that participation is sometimes subjective, however I truly believe that I am deserving of a higher evaluation in this case. In this letter, I will outline the reasoning behind my request, along with hyperlinks to the appropriate documentation.

I received a final graded rubric on April 27th, 2022 from Dr. Abraham that included my marks for participation of 26/35 possible marks; there were no additional comments on this section, though the rubric specified that participation was marked based on independence, enthusiasm, and initiative. While reviewing this by email with her (Images 1-4), Dr. Abraham posited that I displayed ??no thought, questions, or initiative beyond the project aims? and a lack of enthusiasm during the Winter 2022 semester (Image 2). I will discuss each of these points in the following paragraphs.

1. In terms of initiative, there are several examples of engagement considerably beyond the scope of my project through the year. Firstly, I proposed several specific experiments that I thought would add value to the project goals. For example, I brought forward the idea of including a Seahorse Assay, among others, to extend my evaluation of mitochondria in our cells of interest. These experiments were documented in ?experiment planning?? of my physical lab book (considered laboratory property and in the possession of Dr. Abraham), as well as in a google sheet that I created and maintained to track my progress through the year.

2. Further, I proposed a project on a related cellular process intended for an extended involvement under Dr. Abraham??s supervision that combined my interest in miRNA with a process called Clonal Haematopoiesis that another graduate student in the group was evaluating at the time; this was unrelated to my 595 project and demonstrates how interested I was in the general research area. miRNA had been a topic of discussion between Dr. Abraham and myself for some time prior to this proposal. My passion for Dr. Abraham??s work was further exemplified by the fact that I applied for two separate graduate programs for continued involvement with the Abraham Lab as a Graduate Student, with Dr. Abraham??s support.

3. Additionally, I believe the hours I contributed to the laboratory are significant in this case. While the typical course at Queen??s expects between 10-15 hours of work from students weekly, I routinely exceeded that in a single day. Hours recorded in my laboratory book demonstrate that during some weeks, I worked in excess of 40 hours on sample collections, cell isolations, and experimentation. This was in addition to the reading and writing I completed on my own time.

4. The second semester brought significant covid-related challenges to my project. I tested positive for Covid-19 on January 31st, 2022, resulting in the cessation of experiments I had ongoing, as nobody could finish them while I was in quarantine. I was working remotely due to my symptoms until February 14th, 2022. At this point in time, I was reliant upon access to bone marrow samples from hip replacement surgeries for my project to continue. Unfortunately, Covid resulted in the cancellation of these procedures between December 14th, 2021 and March 7th, 2022. In the interim, I completed a few remaining experiments that used samples I could access and wrote my final thesis report. Records of my experiments provide evidence that, once I had the samples I required, I worked hard to complete the experiments I had left ahead of our poster deadline of April 5th, 2022 (second page of previously mentioned google sheet).

I feel that I should outline my interactions with Dr. Abraham concerning grading protocol of my thesis report in order to provide additional context:

?? On April 18th, 2022, following my submission of the report, Dr. Abraham notified me that she would be sharing my thesis report with additional markers for a second opinion; this was in contradiction to course documentation we had signed in November 2020 and in an additional email from Dr. Louise Winn. I expressed (Images 1-5) to Dr. Abraham my concerns over the sharing of my work, stating that I was happy to include additional markers so long as they were familiar with the circumstances of an independent study (595) versus an Honours Thesis (Image 5). She ultimately decided to mark the report independently on April 20th, 2022.

?? To my surprise, Dr. Abraham referred back to this interaction during an informal review of my participation grade on April 28th, stating that ??I have tried to be very fair with you, and at your insistence marked your report, without a second opinion?. This was neither the topic of the informal review, nor was preventing a second opinion something I had requested.

I deeply care about the work I have done while involved with Dr. Abraham??s group, and I can honestly say that I have put my absolute best effort into being productive for her. There is no physical evidence I can provide to prove I was dedicated and enthusiastic about the work I completed for my LISC 595 project. However, I do hope that the above examples not only show my engagement with the project, but also that the assessment of my participation does not fairly draw on all the evidence.

If you would like any clarification, or if you feel it would be a benefit to speak directly, I would be more than willing to schedule a zoom call. I know this is a very busy time of year, so I greatly appreciate any time you can give to my appeal request.

Yours Sincerely,
Emily Mason (20090809)