Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Petition Letter: Request for Formal Grade Review – PHIL 378 Final Paper

Dear Associate Dean,

I am writing to formally request a Level-1 Grade Review of my final paper in PHIL 378, which was assigned a grade of 0 and resulted in a failing final course grade.
I have already completed an informal grade review with the course instructor. I received written feedback on my final paper, but the assigned grade of zero remains. Based on the feedback and the nature of my submission, I believe there are strong grounds to request a formal review.

Grounds for Review

This request is based on error, discrepancy in marking, and procedural fairness, as defined in the Student Guide for Grade Reviews.

1.The grade of zero is not grounded in the feedback provided
The instructor’s written feedback identifies issues such as:
a. Unclear structure.
b. Conceptual conflation.
c. Improper or incorrect citations,
d. Weak engagement with the course material.

However, the feedback also clearly shows that:
a. A full paper was submitted.
b. Arguments were presented.
c. Course texts were engaged with.
d. Sources were cited (even if imperfectly).
A grade of 0 normally corresponds to a missing submission, a blank paper, or confirmed academic misconduct. None of these conditions apply to my case, and none are alleged in the feedback. There is therefore a serious discrepancy between the qualitative evaluation and the numeric grade assigned.

2.There is no finding of academic misconduct
My paper was submitted through Turnitin and did not receive any plagiarism or integrity flags. No academic integrity process was initiated in relation to this submission. I was never notified of any academic misconduct investigation, nor was I given an opportunity to respond to such an allegation. The feedback critiques my analysis and use of sources but does not identify plagiarism, copying, or violation of academic integrity procedures.
Assigning a grade of zero in the absence of a misconduct finding raises serious concerns regarding procedural and grading consistency.

3.The decision is not grounded in logic or evidence
While the instructor is entitled to evaluate the quality of my work, a grade of zero is not a reasonable outcome for a substantive written submission that contains original writing, argumentation, and engagement with course readings. The feedback itself demonstrates that the work was assessable and was assessed, making a zero inconsistent with both the evidence and Queen’s grading standards.

4.Course and assignment documentation is available
Although the course site is now closed, I have retained screenshots of the final paper requirements and submission instructions. These materials can be provided to the reviewers upon request. These documents demonstrate that the work I submitted met the basic requirements for the assignment and is fully reviewable by a third-party reader.

Request
I am therefore requesting that my final paper be reviewed by independent qualified readers in accordance with the Level-1 Grade Review process. I am not asking for special consideration or leniency — only that the paper be evaluated fairly and in accordance with the grading criteria and procedures.

I am submitting the required materials, including:
a. The marked feedback provided by the instructor.
b. A clean copy of my final paper.
c. Screenshots of the assignment requirements.
d. The relevant course materials.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Baicun Wu
Student Number: 20304715
PHIL 378