Petition Letter
January 10, 2020
Dr. Jenn Stephenson
Associate Dean (Studies)
Faculty of Arts and Science
Queen's University
Dear Dr. Stephenson,
ACADEMIC APPEAL
I am appealing the grade on my term paper in MUSC 171 - Social History Popular Music. I believe there was a systemic grading error on OnQ which was improperly handled as per the following details.
There was a grading discrepancy between the rubric and the actual mark on the paper. The rubric showed a grade of A+ (92.5) while the actual grade was only a B.
I contacted the Lecturer of the course, Robbie MacKay, to inquiry into the issue. Mr. MacKay did not know what happened or why this occurred. Subsequently, Mr. MacKay adjusted the rubric to match the actual grade which included his reread of the paper. A copy of the email correspondence with Mr. MacKay is attached.
I believe this was an inherently biased method to resolve the discrepancy and instead the paper should have been independently reviewed without knowledge of the existing mark.
In support of the higher grade, I have attached a PDF file showing the detailed screenshots of the original rubric as well as my actual paper. Additionally, I have scored A+ or A in every other area of this course and I am on the Dean's Honour List in the Life Sciences program. I sincerely believe this to be an A grade paper.
In this situation, I believe it is only fair that the original rubric should take precedence or an independent, unbiased re-mark should be done.
Please contact me if you require any other information or questions, otherwise I will await your decision.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kaelen Partridge
18kap1@queensu.ca
Student Number: 20127197
905-327-9498
Dr. Jenn Stephenson
Associate Dean (Studies)
Faculty of Arts and Science
Queen's University
Dear Dr. Stephenson,
ACADEMIC APPEAL
I am appealing the grade on my term paper in MUSC 171 - Social History Popular Music. I believe there was a systemic grading error on OnQ which was improperly handled as per the following details.
There was a grading discrepancy between the rubric and the actual mark on the paper. The rubric showed a grade of A+ (92.5) while the actual grade was only a B.
I contacted the Lecturer of the course, Robbie MacKay, to inquiry into the issue. Mr. MacKay did not know what happened or why this occurred. Subsequently, Mr. MacKay adjusted the rubric to match the actual grade which included his reread of the paper. A copy of the email correspondence with Mr. MacKay is attached.
I believe this was an inherently biased method to resolve the discrepancy and instead the paper should have been independently reviewed without knowledge of the existing mark.
In support of the higher grade, I have attached a PDF file showing the detailed screenshots of the original rubric as well as my actual paper. Additionally, I have scored A+ or A in every other area of this course and I am on the Dean's Honour List in the Life Sciences program. I sincerely believe this to be an A grade paper.
In this situation, I believe it is only fair that the original rubric should take precedence or an independent, unbiased re-mark should be done.
Please contact me if you require any other information or questions, otherwise I will await your decision.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Kaelen Partridge
18kap1@queensu.ca
Student Number: 20127197
905-327-9498