Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Manage Appeals

Petition Type: New
ID: 10704
Submitted: June 15, 2023 at 12:11:27 PM
First Name: Elizabeth
Last Name: Johnson
Pronoun: she/her
Student Number: 20293742
Degree Program: BAH
Plan: LLCU
Level of Study: 2

Petition Categories

Petition Categories: Waive the requirement to withdraw for one year

Level 1 Status

Status: Denied

Level 2

Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 213
Submitted: July 25, 2023 at 8:13:48 AM
Relevant Petition: 10704
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Waive the requirement to withdraw for one year

Appeal Grounds

Appeals to the Board of Studies must include a letter based on one or more of the Grounds for Appeal (Appeal Regulation 3.4). What are the grounds you are basing your appeal on?
  • The Associate Dean's decision did not follow the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as the Associate Dean failed to:
    • Make a reasonable decision in your appeal. A “reasonable” decision is one that is based on evidence, thought out and supported by facts and logical inferences from the facts. To be reasonable, the decision must contain adequate reasons for the conclusions.
Appeal Grounds Details: I am of the firm belief that the decision made by the Associate Dean of Studies was unreasonable, based on the grounds that my arguments were not properly heard. Within my initial letter, I outlined that I had been undergoing Mental and Physical Health concerns. I explained that these mental health concerns impacted my academic performance and rational. As I was not in a place to think or act based in logic, my petition was denied which is unreasonable given the aforementioned circumstances.

In the Fall semester, I had experienced a traumatic event that made me feel unsafe on Queen’s campus and caused past traumas to resurface. I was in denial regarding how impactful and severe these instances had been on my mental health. As such, I was not able to rationally and logically make the decision to withdraw at the halfway mark of the semester.

In the Winter semester, I was experiencing a toxic living situation that resulted in me feeling unsafe in my own house which took tolls on my mental health. Within this time, I was also undergoing several physical ailments that made it unable for me to go to campus. Medical professionals were unable to ascertain how long it would take me to recover from my ailments and as such could not provide me with updated accommodations to submit to QSAS at the time. Since they were unsure on timings, I was hopeful I would be able to return to my studies in a timely manner since I had been keeping up with material on my own.

I have been put onto a waitlist to consult with a specialist before the end of the summer and have been working with several doctors to provide remedies in the meantime, including updates to my accommodations in case of other health complications. I did not reach out for mental health help at the time however, that has since been remedied. I have been steadily working towards healing and have shown exponential amounts of growth. I have been connecting with resources, both at Queen’s and within the Kingston community that have had strong, positive results on my overall wellbeing, making me certain that I will be successful in the upcoming academic school year.

Appeal Letter

Appeal Letter: In response to Academic Petition Submission Number 10704, I respectfully disagree with the decision. In the decision letter, the Associate Dean of Studies stated that my appeal was denied on the grounds that I had ample time to withdraw, experienced similar issues in the past and was connected to Queen’s Student Accommodation Services (QSAS) prior to these instances. To start, I did not have ample time as I previously stated I was experiencing both mental and physical illness that did not line up with published academic deadlines. I was not in a position mentally to make logical decisions at the time, hence me coming forth now. I addressed this as I am seeing a mental health specialist and regularly attending therapy sessions provided through Queen’s University. While I had experienced past traumatic events, the new ones faced in the past school year compounded and amplified the impact this had on me. Just because Sexual Violence is experienced in the past, does not mean that the second time it occurs makes it any easier. Healing is not a linear process and this was a rather large set back. This does not negate that work was done in the first place, that was found to be successful at the time. The Queen’s therapist I’ve been meeting with and Barb Lotan both agree that I am making steady progress and feel confident that I will be successful with the Academic plan outlined in my initial submission. I have Accommodations through QSAS for ADHD however, did not have proof at the time from a doctor to submit any new accommodations due to my health. This has since been remedied and I will be submitting updated accommodations to QSAS before September. It was stated that my “petition did not demonstrate that my extenuating circumstances are being managed in a way that will make me successful in future classes” to which I whole heartedly disagree, as do the Queen’s staff and resources I’ve been working alongside to ensure my success for the upcoming academic school year. My academic plan was ran by Barb Lotan, from the Human Rights and Equity Office, before writing a letter to support my claims, Sam Lall, from Arts and Sciences Considerations, recommended I submit this appeal, and Nadia Sawaya-Fehr, a Queen’s therapist has been seeing steady progress in my healing journey. As per the appeal letter, I have already been steadily using Queen’s resources and have seen tremendous levels of growth already. With all of this stated, I see no reason for me to have to withdraw for a year.

Documentation

Level 2 Amendment

Appeal Type: Level 2 Amendment
ID: 214
Submitted: July 28, 2023 at 2:29:37 PM
Relevant Petition: 10704

Appeal Grounds

Appeals to the Board of Studies must include a letter based on one or more of the Grounds for Appeal (Appeal Regulation 3.4). What are the grounds you are basing your appeal on?
  • The Associate Dean's decision did not follow the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as the Associate Dean failed to:
    • Make a reasonable decision in your appeal. A “reasonable” decision is one that is based on evidence, thought out and supported by facts and logical inferences from the facts. To be reasonable, the decision must contain adequate reasons for the conclusions.

Documentation