Review of Course Grades or Dean's Decisions on Academic Standings or Awards
Students with concerns on course grades/ Dean's decision on academic standings or awards should resolve the matter via the respective procedures outlined below.
Disagreement with the academic judgment of the Course Leaders/ the Deans is not a valid reason for review.
As a result of review, grades may be revised upwards, downwards or remain unchanged.
Review of Course Grades
Informal Resolution
- Students who believe that there was an administrative error in recording or calculating the mark or result, or other circumstances that impact the course grade awarded should contact the Course Leader within 5 working days of the announcement of grades to resolve the matter.
- The Course Leader will notify the student of the result no later than 13 working days following the announcement of grades.
Formal Procedure
Valid Reasons for Applying to Review Course Grades
- There was a procedural irregularity in the assessment process e.g. the assessment was not conducted in accordance with the Academic Regulations or with the arrangements prescribed for the course.
- There were extenuating circumstances affecting a student's performance such as illness, hospitalization, accident, family bereavement or other unforeseeable serious personal or emotional circumstances that the student was unable to bring up prior to the assessment for valid reasons.
Procedures
- Submit the application in writing to the Dean of the College/School offering the course or the Chair of the Course Validation and Monitoring Committee (CrsVMC) for GE courses offered by academic support units within 22 working days of the announcement of grades.
- The application letter must:
- state the grounds on which the request for review is made;
- include a description of the relevant facts; and
- provide supporting evidence.
Notification of Results
- The Dean of the College/School or the Chair of CrsVMC will notify the student by letter about the results of the review application no later than 54 working days following the announcement of grades.
- If, in the view of the Dean of the College/School or the Chair of CrsVMC, there is no prima facie case, he/she will dismiss the application and the decision is final.
Further Requests for Appeal
- Formal requests for review of course grades should normally be resolved at the College/School/course-offering academic support unit level.
- Students who believe that there was a procedural irregularity in the review process can convey the concern to the Associate Provost (Academic Affairs) by email at prvt@cityu.edu.hk within 10 working days following receipt of the decision on formal review.
- The Associate Provost will notify the student in writing of the decision normally no later than 27 working days following receipt of the request and the decision is final.
Review of Dean's Decisions on Academic Standings or Awards
Informal Resolution
- Students who believe that there was an administrative error in recording, transcription or reporting of result should contact the Programme/Major Leader within 5 working days of the publication of the Dean's decision to resolve the matter.
- The Programme/Major Leader will notify the student of the result no later than 8 working days following receipt of the request.
Formal Procedure
Valid Reasons for Applying to Review Dean's Decisions
- There was a procedural irregularity affecting the Dean's decision.
- There were extenuating circumstances that have a bearing on the Dean's decision that the student was unable to bring to the attention of the Dean for valid reasons.
Procedures
- Submit the application to the Associate Provost (Academic Affairs) by email at prvt@cityu.edu.hk within 22 working days of the publication of the Dean's decision.
- The application letter must:
- state the grounds on which the request for review is made;
- include a description of the relevant facts; and
- provide supporting evidence.
Notification of Results
- The Associate Provost will notify the student by letter about the results of the review application no later than 22 working days following receipt of the request.
- If, in the view of the Associate Provost, there is no prima facie case, he/she will dismiss the application and the decision is final.
Further Requests for Appeal
- Formal request for review of Dean's decisions should normally be resolved by the Academic Review Committee.
- Students who believe that there was a procedural irregularity in the review process can convey the concern in writing to the Provost within 10 working days following receipt of the decision on formal review.
- The Provost will notify the student in writing of the decision no later than 22 working days following receipt of the request and the decision is final.
Personal Information Collection Statement
The information provided may be disclosed/transferred to relevant academic units/ administrative offices within the University for consideration and/or necessary actions.
The Privacy Policy Statement of the University can be accessed at http://www.cityu.edu.hk/cityu/geninfo/privacy.htm. For other issues regarding personal data privacy, please contact the Office of the Vice-President (Administration) or send email to the Data Protection Officer at data.protection@cityu.edu.hk.
The College/School Grade Review Committee is established by the College/School Board. The period of office of members is two years.
Terms of Reference
- To decide whether a student has established grounds for review of course grades, in accordance with AR15.1.7.
- To refer substantiated cases to the appropriate Assessment Panel(s).
- To dismiss requests for review where cases are not substantiated.
- To receive reports from Assessment Panels in relation to cases referred by this committee.
- To identify any academic quality or wider issues raised by each case.
- To report annually to the Senate via the Quality Assurance Committee on review cases considered.
Constitution
Chair:
Dean (or nominee)
Members:
- One full-time academic staff member from the College/School (nominated by Department Head/School Dean)
- 5 academic staff members are suggested to be appointed as potential members
- One full-time academic staff from another College/School (nominated by the Dean of other College/School)
- 3 academic staff members are suggested to be appointed as potential members
Secretary:
Administrative staff member of the College/School
Terms of Reference
- To decide whether a student has established grounds for review of course grades, in accordance with AR15.1.7.
- To refer substantiated cases to the appropriate Assessment Panel(s).
- To dismiss requests for review where cases are not substantiated.
- To receive reports from Assessment Panels in relation to cases referred by this committee.
- To identify any academic quality or wider issues raised by each case.
- To report annually to the Senate via the Quality Assurance Committee on review cases considered.
Constitution
Chair:
Associate Provost (Quality Assurance and Accountability) or nominee
Members:
Two full-time academic staff from Colleges/Schools nominated by the Head of the host unit
Secretary:
An administrative staff appointed by the Head of the host unit
When a postgraduate student case is considered, the Dean of Graduate Studies will chair the meeting and the secretary will be from School of Graduate Studies. When an undergraduate student case is considered, the Associate Provost (Academic Affairs) will chair the meeting and the secretary will be from the Academic Regulations and Records Office. The term of office of the members appointed by the Senate shall be two years with a staggered arrangement.
Terms of Reference
- To decide whether a student has established grounds for review of Dean's decisions
- To refer substantiated review cases to the appropriate Dean(s)
- To decide whether a student has established grounds for appeal against College/School Grade Review Committees
- To refer substantiated appeal cases to the appropriate Assessment Panel(s)
- To dismiss requests for review/appeal where cases are not substantiated
- To receive reports from Deans/Assessment Panels in relation to cases referred by this committee
- To identify any academic quality or wider issues raised by each case
- To report annually to the Senate via the Quality Assurance Committee on review cases considered
Constitution
Co-Chairmen:
Dean of Graduate Studies (or nominee) and
Associate Provost (Academic Affairs) (or nominee)
Associate Provost (Academic Affairs) (or nominee)
Members:
Two full-time academic staff appointed by the Senate
A pool of 10 academic staff members will be appointed as potential members
A pool of 10 academic staff members will be appointed as potential members
Co-Secretaries:
Director (Graduate Studies Administration), School of Graduate Studies (or nominee) and
Director of Academic Regulations and Records Office (or nominee)
Director of Academic Regulations and Records Office (or nominee)
If there is any inconsistency or ambiguity between the page contents and the Academic Regulations (AR), rules and guidelines, the AR, rules and guidelines shall prevail.