Manage Appeals
Petition Type: New
ID: 12550
Submitted: December 28, 2024 at 4:24:59 PM
First Name: isaac
Last Name: wintle
Pronoun: him
Preferred Name: isaac
Student Number: 20306698
Email: 21ijw1@queensu.ca
Degree Program: BAH
Plan: HIST
Level of Study: 4
Petition Categories
Petition Categories: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Code: ECON 110
Term: Fall/Winter
Year: 2021
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Ian Cromb
Section/Class Number: 1
Code: POLS 110
Term: Fall/Winter
Year: 2021
Petition Category: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses
Instructor's Name: Jonathan Rose
Section/Class Number: 1
Level 1 Status
Status: DeniedLevel 2
Appeal Type: Level 2
ID: 307
Submitted: February 10, 2025 at 4:51:17 PM
Relevant Petition: 12550
Decision(s) Being Appealed: Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: ECON 110, Fall/Winter 2021 (Ian Cromb)
Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: POLS 110, Fall/Winter 2021 (Jonathan Rose)
Request credit (CR) standing in a course or courses: POLS 110, Fall/Winter 2021 (Jonathan Rose)
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: The first part of the decision I would say is unreasonable is in regards to the statement
Appeal Letter
Appeal Letter: If the documentation and circumstances prove that I was significantly impacted and unable to perform well in academics, then under the guidelines I should be able to appeal and change those grades. I understand that there is a deadline to appeal, although I do not see how appealing one year versus one year and one day after, ten days after, or two years after makes any difference to the circumstances. Furthermore, the reasoning to say that I could have submitted documentation, a strong and coherent argument, and an overall strong petition at that time while I was unaware of the option, focusing on my mental health, family issues, and schoolwork, all on the basis that I was able to complete classes the year after is not reasonable. I was also able to complete classes during my extreme mental health struggles, it does not mean I could have done any number of other things at that time. Furthermore, the claim that the classes were done well and that is a sign that I could have petitioned does not seem reasonable. My GPA was still quite low during that semester, and not even close to a full course load. A better example of my abilities when I am actually free of these problems is the 3.9 I achieved last semester.
Overall the documentation and statement are acknowledged to prove that I faced circumstances that severely impacted my ability to perform well in first year. The reasoning that I could have submitted an earlier appeal is unreasonable and not based on strong evidence, and the idea that I am responsible because I could have just dropped a years worth of classes or retaken everything is not logical. The year deadline itself does not seem that reasonable, but even on those grounds I was unable to submit a petition during that time, which is agreed upon by the doctor at Queens Health and Wellness services. Completing some courses does not equal ability to submit a strong petition and documentation. I am a hard working student who's entire family has attended Queens University. As has been proven I went through an extremely dark period during my first year, and even after that. I was unable to appeal and the reasoning to deny my appeal is unreasonable. I am asking to just have two grades changed due to mental health, family struggles, and the pandemic. I would greatly appreciate if you could reconsider. Thank you.
Overall the documentation and statement are acknowledged to prove that I faced circumstances that severely impacted my ability to perform well in first year. The reasoning that I could have submitted an earlier appeal is unreasonable and not based on strong evidence, and the idea that I am responsible because I could have just dropped a years worth of classes or retaken everything is not logical. The year deadline itself does not seem that reasonable, but even on those grounds I was unable to submit a petition during that time, which is agreed upon by the doctor at Queens Health and Wellness services. Completing some courses does not equal ability to submit a strong petition and documentation. I am a hard working student who's entire family has attended Queens University. As has been proven I went through an extremely dark period during my first year, and even after that. I was unable to appeal and the reasoning to deny my appeal is unreasonable. I am asking to just have two grades changed due to mental health, family struggles, and the pandemic. I would greatly appreciate if you could reconsider. Thank you.
Documentation
I plan to submit additional documentation at a later date: I do not have additional documentation to provide as I believe what I have submitted is sufficient. That being said if it is required I can attempt to get more.
Level 2 Amendment
Appeal Type: Level 2 Amendment
ID: 308
Submitted: February 10, 2025 at 5:03:13 PM
Relevant Petition: 12550
New Information: I am worried what I typed into the first box was not all recorded. I am going to retype it here, ignore this if it was received the first time.
The first part of the decision I would say is unreasonable is in regards to the statement
The first part of the decision I would say is unreasonable is in regards to the statement
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.

