Summary
Miss C complained that her university failed to provide adequate guidance for her first attempt at her dissertation. She also complained that the university did not allow her to resit two assessments that she had previously passed, even though she had mitigating circumstances.
We found that when dealing with her academic appeal, the university accepted that there were problems with the supervision Miss C received. Therefore, we upheld this aspect of Miss C's complaint. However, because the university had already apologised to Miss C and she had resat the failed component, we had no recommendations to make as the matter had been remedied.
University regulations were clear that a student could not resit an assessment that had already been passed in order to improve their mark, even if there were mitigating circumstances. In dealing with Miss C's case, the university balanced the need to adhere to their regulations with the exercise of their academic judgement. We cannot question the exercise of academic judgement, and there was no evidence that the university failed to follow their regulations in Miss C's case. Therefore, we did not uphold this aspect of Miss C's complaint.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201605940 as a PDF (11.11 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018