Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

Queen Margaret University

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Not Upheld Reference 201103563 Sector Education Category Academic appeal/exam results/degree classification Decided 01 July 2012

View Queen Margaret University, Edinburgh scorecard

Full decision

Summary

Mr C studied remotely for a masters degree. He was required to write a dissertation over a period of two years. He proposed a topic for his dissertation and began work on it, supported by his allocated supervisor. Mr C said that he came to realise that his chosen topic had certain limitations. He requested a change of topic but was told that this would not be possible and that he would have to complete the original dissertation or withdraw from the programme. He completed the dissertation but failed. Upon being allowed to resubmit his dissertation, he again asked about a change of topic, but was again refused.

Mr C complained that his change of topic was refused based on time constraints, but felt that there was ample time to complete the required work. He believed he would have passed his masters programme had he been allowed to change topic to one more relevant to his experience and interests.

We found that, although the university's guidance does not mention a specific procedure for considering such requests, it makes it clear that the university has the ultimate say on whether a topic is acceptable. We found that Mr C was told that it was possible to change topics and that the decision was his. However, after submitting his proposed timeline, he was advised that he could not do so. He was told this in good time for completing the required work. After he asked if he could change topics for his resubmission, he was told that this was an option, but was strongly advised against changing due to the lack of support that would be available to him. We found that it was Mr C's choice not to change at this stage.

We did not uphold Mr C's complaint as we were satisfied that nothing went wrong in the university's process when making the decision not to allow Mr C to change dissertation topics. We did, however, make a recommendation as, although they reached their decision quickly and did not alter it, we recognised that some of their communication with Mr C was confusing.

Recommendation We recommended that the university: • include in their guidance documents information on the consideration process following requests from students to change dissertation projects.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201103563 as a PDF (23.4 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving Queen Margaret University

Reference Date Summary Outcome
201808623 01 Sep 2021 C had enrolled on two short courses run by Queen Margaret University. They made a number of complaints to us … Partly Upheld
201802084 01 Jul 2019 Mrs C complained on behalf of her daughter (Miss A) about the support the university provided to Miss A. Miss … Upheld
201700088 01 May 2018 Mr C made a submission of an assignment to the university. Having submitted the assignment a year previously, and failed … Not Upheld
201606885 01 Oct 2017 Ms C complained that the university’s investigation of her complaint about aspects of the course she was on was unreasonable. … Not Upheld
201507495 01 Sep 2017 Mr C complained on behalf of his daughter (Miss A), who was a third year student at the university. At … Not Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation