Submit an Academic Petition or Appeal

Petition Letter: To the Associate Dean(s),
My intention in writing this letter is to appeal my final grade for the course GNDS 360: Masculinities: Cross Cultural Perspectives. I feel that this grade is unsubstantiated given my experience of the course as disorganized and inconsistent with respect to marking expectations. But ultimately, I feel that the grade does not reflect the quality of the work that I submitted for the class; I will discuss this in terms of my concerns with the course.
The course was disorganized in that there were last minute editions made to assignment guidelines, and the quizzes were poorly conducted. The night before the first assignment was due, the professor sent students an email which ¿¿reiterated¿ assignment guidelines. The new rubric stipulated that students must approach the second half of the paper as self-reflective, detailing their personal engagement with the media chosen for analysis; this was not established prior to the release of the rubric. This recent addition proved difficult for students to incorporate into their papers; I had completed my paper by this point and had other assignments to focus my efforts on.
There were three in-class quizzes to be completed throughout the term, in which 15 minutes were to be allotted at the end of class for students to write the quiz. However, we were given approximately 10 minutes of in-class time to complete quite strenuous quizzes, which often required students to recall several specific features of an assigned journal article reading. When this concern was raised, the professor proposed that students stay after class to complete the quiz. However, many students in the class were enrolled in GNDS 311: Feminist Thought, which commenced immediately following the GNDS 360 lecture, and had in-class assessments scheduled for the same three days. Therefore, students enrolled in both GNDS 360 and GNDS 311, were forced to decide between taking extra time to ensure that they had 15 minutes to complete the quiz, or showing up late to the following class.
My concerns extend to the grading of course assignments. Following the collective appeal, the instructor advocated for individual meetings with herself. I appealed to the professor¿¿s request and set up a meeting to address my personal concerns. I expressed my concern with my mark for the first assignment (Media Analysis assignment), as well as with the marking of my quizzes. The professor amended my grade for the Media Analysis assignment from a ¿C¿¿ to a ¿C+¿¿; notably, this change is not reflected in onQ. The amended grade does not reflect the content of the paper, because I went beyond the assignment guidelines with my incorporation of an intersectional analysis. Notably, the intersectional approach which has predominated the space of other GNDS studies classes I have taken, was not mentioned by the professor in class (I attended 90 percent of lectures). However, my paper was critiqued by both the professor and the Teaching Assistant for not employing an expansive intersectional analysis. Further, the professor did not address my concerns regarding the TA¿¿s grading of the quizzes; this evokes my concerns regarding the grading of the Teaching Assistant.
The grading for the quizzes seemingly diverged from the expectations demonstrated by the professor in lecture. The professor projected her answers for the second quiz following student requests, and I believe that my short answer responses resembled her answers. However, I received a mark of zero for the component. Further, in his comments for the first assignment, the TA critiqued student¿¿s colloquial use of the terms ¿male¿¿ and ¿female¿¿ in their papers, ¿¿¿¿Males¿ and ¿¿females¿: these terms are scientific in nature and often end up being transphobic.¿ I reference this instance because it demonstrates the disconnect between classroom expectations and dialogue, with the grading of the course. The professor frequently discussed gender using the terms ¿male¿¿ and ¿female¿¿, and while I understand the issue with these terms, this comment by the TA is unfair, in that students were replicating the language used by the professor in their papers.
Finally, I think it is important to include that I saw a dramatic shift in the marking of the final assignment (Interview Project), following the solutions proposed by the department. I had expressed concern regarding this assignment during my meeting with the professor; I felt that the group dynamic had perhaps impeded the overall quality of the assignment. Notably, I have been in groups where the execution in the final minutes of the assignment was of concern, but given the marking standards of the course, my feelings of uneasiness were amplified. I was advised by the professor to amend the document I had submitted regarding the group dynamic, to include any last-minute issues that I could not previously iterate. To my surprise, my group received a letter grade of a ¿B+¿¿, which defied previous marking standards. I was relieved with the outcome, but was confused given previous grading standards.
My intention in writing this letter is not to complain about the course or the mark I received. I truly feel that this grade is unfair given the circumstances which I outlined above, as well as the quality of the work that I submitted. I have accepted substandard grades for assignments/ assessments, where I put in the work but simply could not execute; if I believed this to be the case in this instance, I would not appeal for a regrade.
Sincerely,

Emma Price