Petition Letter
Dear Associate Dean,
I am requesting a formal review of my STAT 353 (Probability II) final exam. This petition is submitted with the approval of the Undergraduate Chair regarding timelines, following completion of the informal review process with Professor Mingo, which included written correspondence, a Zoom meeting to go over my exam, and a follow-up discussion with the Undergraduate Chair.
This is not a request I make lightly. I respect the grading process and the work required to evaluate each student’s performance. However, I believe my narrow failure in this course, by only a small margin of roughly two marks, was directly caused by the university’s inability to provide timely assignment feedback during the strike. This broke the essential agreement between students and course directors: that assignments will be marked and returned in time to guide preparation for the final exam.
My exam includes several questions where I believe partial credit was warranted.
Question 6: I identified that the expectation was infinite, demonstrating partial understanding even if incomplete.
Question 8: I applied the correct substitution method but made a single transcription error. The method itself was correct and should earn partial marks.
Question 9: I correctly set up the problem and made progress toward the solution before losing track later. This starting work aligned with marking expectations.
Question 11: I identified the moment-generating function and the correct next step, showing clear understanding of the solution path despite not completing it.
These points together could easily make up the two marks I needed to pass the course.
A core part of any course is the feedback cycle. Students complete assignments, receive timely feedback, and use that feedback to improve before the final. In STAT 353 this Winter 2025 term, that cycle was broken.
Assignments 6 to 8, which covered material closely tied to the final exam, were never returned before the final and remain unreturned. Because of the strike and the resulting disruption, I received no feedback on more than one-third of the term’s assignments. This denied me the chance to identify weaknesses, correct mistakes, learn from my errors, and align my approach with the course’s expectations.
This was more than unfortunate timing. It undermined the fairness of the assessment process. Students are expected to submit work on time, attend class, and prepare for assessments. In return, the university is expected to provide the tools necessary for learning and exam preparation, including timely feedback. That part of the agreement was not fulfilled in this course.
On top of the missing feedback, we were informed at short notice that the final exam would include multiple-choice questions. This was a format not previously emphasized and one that typically allows less opportunity for partial marks. With so little time to adapt, I was unable to adjust my study approach or practice effectively in the new format.
Before the final, my performance showed consistent understanding and effort.
Assignments 1 to 5: 75%, 82%, 95%, 90%, 100%
Quiz 2a: 67%
This track record supports my belief that, had I received feedback on Assignments 6 to 8 in time, I could have addressed my weaknesses and achieved the additional two marks required for a passing result on the final.
After receiving my grade, I reviewed my marked exam in detail and re-solved every question with a tutor. I presented my corrected work and partial-credit arguments to Professor Mingo both in writing and in our Zoom meeting.
Despite these efforts, no marks were adjusted, which has led me to submit this formal petition.
I am asking for leniency and a fair review in light of the fact that my narrow failure was not due to a lack of effort or preparation, but to the breakdown of the feedback process that is fundamental to a fair final evaluation. I met my obligations as a student, and the university, through no deliberate fault, was unable to meet its corresponding obligation to equip me with the necessary feedback to prepare effectively.
Thank you for your time, understanding, and consideration. I am happy to provide any further details if needed.
Sincerely,
Guy Cohen
20359907
I am requesting a formal review of my STAT 353 (Probability II) final exam. This petition is submitted with the approval of the Undergraduate Chair regarding timelines, following completion of the informal review process with Professor Mingo, which included written correspondence, a Zoom meeting to go over my exam, and a follow-up discussion with the Undergraduate Chair.
This is not a request I make lightly. I respect the grading process and the work required to evaluate each student’s performance. However, I believe my narrow failure in this course, by only a small margin of roughly two marks, was directly caused by the university’s inability to provide timely assignment feedback during the strike. This broke the essential agreement between students and course directors: that assignments will be marked and returned in time to guide preparation for the final exam.
My exam includes several questions where I believe partial credit was warranted.
Question 6: I identified that the expectation was infinite, demonstrating partial understanding even if incomplete.
Question 8: I applied the correct substitution method but made a single transcription error. The method itself was correct and should earn partial marks.
Question 9: I correctly set up the problem and made progress toward the solution before losing track later. This starting work aligned with marking expectations.
Question 11: I identified the moment-generating function and the correct next step, showing clear understanding of the solution path despite not completing it.
These points together could easily make up the two marks I needed to pass the course.
A core part of any course is the feedback cycle. Students complete assignments, receive timely feedback, and use that feedback to improve before the final. In STAT 353 this Winter 2025 term, that cycle was broken.
Assignments 6 to 8, which covered material closely tied to the final exam, were never returned before the final and remain unreturned. Because of the strike and the resulting disruption, I received no feedback on more than one-third of the term’s assignments. This denied me the chance to identify weaknesses, correct mistakes, learn from my errors, and align my approach with the course’s expectations.
This was more than unfortunate timing. It undermined the fairness of the assessment process. Students are expected to submit work on time, attend class, and prepare for assessments. In return, the university is expected to provide the tools necessary for learning and exam preparation, including timely feedback. That part of the agreement was not fulfilled in this course.
On top of the missing feedback, we were informed at short notice that the final exam would include multiple-choice questions. This was a format not previously emphasized and one that typically allows less opportunity for partial marks. With so little time to adapt, I was unable to adjust my study approach or practice effectively in the new format.
Before the final, my performance showed consistent understanding and effort.
Assignments 1 to 5: 75%, 82%, 95%, 90%, 100%
Quiz 2a: 67%
This track record supports my belief that, had I received feedback on Assignments 6 to 8 in time, I could have addressed my weaknesses and achieved the additional two marks required for a passing result on the final.
After receiving my grade, I reviewed my marked exam in detail and re-solved every question with a tutor. I presented my corrected work and partial-credit arguments to Professor Mingo both in writing and in our Zoom meeting.
Despite these efforts, no marks were adjusted, which has led me to submit this formal petition.
I am asking for leniency and a fair review in light of the fact that my narrow failure was not due to a lack of effort or preparation, but to the breakdown of the feedback process that is fundamental to a fair final evaluation. I met my obligations as a student, and the university, through no deliberate fault, was unable to meet its corresponding obligation to equip me with the necessary feedback to prepare effectively.
Thank you for your time, understanding, and consideration. I am happy to provide any further details if needed.
Sincerely,
Guy Cohen
20359907