1. Introduction
Francis James is committed to maintaining high academic standards and delivering a positive student experience. We recognise that, on occasion, students may wish to question academic decisions or raise concerns about their education. This policy sets out the principles and procedures for academic appeals and complaints, in line with OfS expectations and sector best practices, including guidance from the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA).
2. Purpose and Scope
Academic Appeals: This policy applies to appeals against decisions relating to:
Assessment grades, progression, and award classifications
Extenuating circumstances or mitigation outcomes
Other academic decisions that affect a student’s progression or final award
Complaints: This policy applies to complaints about:
The quality or delivery of teaching, supervision, or programme content
Facilities, resources, or student support services
Actions or lack of actions by Francis James staff or departments that affect a student’s experience
Exclusions:
Matters outside Francis James’ control (e.g., personal disputes between students, wider government policy).
Complaints that fall under separate university processes (e.g., harassment, bullying, or disciplinary issues) may be handled under those specific procedures.
3. Principles
Fairness: All appeals and complaints will be handled in a fair, unbiased, and timely manner, respecting the rights of all parties.
Transparency: Procedures and decisions will be clearly documented, and students will be informed of progress at each stage.
Accessibility: Information regarding this policy will be widely accessible, and reasonable adjustments will be made for students with disabilities or additional learning needs.
Confidentiality: All cases will be treated confidentially, and records will be managed in accordance with Data Protection legislation.
No Detriment: Students will not suffer reprisals or disadvantage for raising a genuine appeal or complaint in good faith.
4. Definitions
Academic Appeal: A request for a review of an academic decision (e.g., mark, progression outcome) on valid grounds, such as procedural error or mitigating circumstances.
Complaint: An expression of dissatisfaction relating to the quality of the student’s educational experience or the services provided by Francis James.
5. Grounds for Academic Appeals
Valid grounds for an appeal typically include:
Procedural Irregularity: A significant error or omission in the assessment or decision-making process.
Extenuating Circumstances: New or previously undisclosed circumstances that could not have been reported earlier for valid reasons.
Evidence of Bias or Prejudice: Where the student can demonstrate the academic decision was influenced by bias.
An appeal cannot be based solely on disagreement with the academic judgement of examiners or the marking standards applied.
6. Academic Appeals Procedure
Stage 1: Informal Resolution
Students are encouraged to discuss their concerns informally with the relevant lecturer, personal tutor, or programme leader.
Many issues can be resolved quickly at this stage, without escalating to a formal appeal.
Stage 2: Formal Appeal Submission
If unresolved, the student must submit a Formal Appeal Form (available on the university website or Student Advice Centre) within the published timeframe (usually 10 working days from the results publication or decision date).
The submission should include clear grounds for appeal and all relevant evidence (e.g., medical certificates, proof of circumstances).
Stage 3: Appeal Review and Outcome
A designated Appeals Panel, composed of senior academic staff not directly involved in the decision being appealed, reviews the evidence.
The panel may request additional information or interviews with relevant parties.
A decision is normally communicated in writing within 20 working days of receipt of the completed appeal.
Possible outcomes include:
Appeal Upheld (with appropriate remedies, e.g., re-mark, re-assessment opportunity, or reconsideration by the original board).
Appeal Rejected (with reasons provided).
Stage 4: Review of Decision
If the student remains dissatisfied, they can request a Review of the Panel’s Decision on limited grounds (e.g., new evidence or procedural flaw).
A senior university official (or a designated reviewer) will re-examine the process.
The outcome of this review is final, and a Completion of Procedures Letter will be issued, allowing the student to escalate the matter externally if desired.
7. Complaints Procedure
Stage 1: Informal Resolution
Wherever possible, students should attempt an informal resolution by discussing the issue with the relevant department, service area, or staff member.
Quick and amicable resolutions are often reached at this level.
Stage 2: Formal Complaint
If the matter cannot be resolved informally, the student submits a Formal Complaint Form within a reasonable timeframe (usually within 20 working days of the issue or the outcome of informal discussions).
The complaint should detail the nature of the concern, the steps already taken, and any requested remedies.
Stage 3: Investigation and Resolution
The Complaints Team or a designated investigator reviews the complaint, gathering evidence and potentially conducting interviews.
A decision is normally communicated within 25 working days of receipt of the formal complaint, outlining the outcome and any remedial actions.
Possible outcomes include:
Complaint Upheld (with corrective measures).
Complaint Partially Upheld.
Complaint Not Upheld.
Stage 4: Review of Decision
If dissatisfied with the Stage 3 outcome, the student can request a Review on specified grounds (e.g., procedural irregularity or new evidence).
A senior manager, independent of the original investigation, will review the process.
A Completion of Procedures Letter is issued at the conclusion of the review.
8. External Review
If a student exhausts the internal processes and remains dissatisfied, they may escalate the issue to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA) within 12 months of receiving the Completion of Procedures Letter. The OIA offers an independent review of the complaint or appeal.
9. Monitoring and Oversight
Monitoring: The university maintains records of all appeals and complaints to identify trends, highlight areas for improvement, and ensure policy effectiveness.
Reporting: An annual report on the volume, nature, and outcomes of academic appeals and complaints is presented to the Senior Management Team to inform continuous quality enhancement.
Review: This policy is reviewed annually or as needed, ensuring ongoing compliance with OfS requirements and alignment with good practice.
10. Data Protection and Confidentiality
All personal data related to appeals and complaints is handled in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR).
Information is only shared with individuals involved in resolving the matter, unless disclosure is required by law or regulatory obligations.
11. Dissemination of Policy
This policy is accessible on the Francis James website and in the Student Handbook.
Staff and students receive guidance on these procedures during inductions, staff training, and through the Student Advice Centre.