If a student disagrees with the evaluation of his/her work by the instructor, but has no basis for a charge of “discrimination” or “capricious evaluation” or “error,” the student should discuss the matter directly with the instructor, and if unsatisfied,
with the department chairperson, and if still unsatisfied, with the dean of the college in which the course was offered. In such cases, the decision of the instructor shall be final.
If a student believes that an improper grade has been assigned, an appeal may be filed on the following grounds:
Every effort should be made to resolve the disagreement at Level I. The student must first seek a resolution to the disagreement with the instructor either in person or in writing. If the student is not satisfied with the results, the student must then
speak with the chairperson of the department that offers the course. If still unsatisfied, the student must discuss the matter with the dean of the college in which the course is offered. A member of the Graduate Student Assembly may accompany and
advise the student during the Level I procedures. Only after all attempts for resolution at Level I have been exhausted may the student initiate Level II.
A. Composition: Each year there shall be appointed a Grade Appeals Committee to determine the existence of the substantive basis for appeal. The committee will be composed of seven voting members: three faculty members appointed by
APSCUF, two members elected by and from the Senate University-Wide Graduate Committee (one faculty member, and one student), the vice provost of the School of Graduate Studies and Research or his or her designee, and one student appointed by the Graduate
Student Assembly. A quorum consists of a majority of the committee. To take action, a majority of those present must be faculty members. If a quorum of the Level II committee is not available to meet within the designated time limits, the Provost’s
Office will seek additional members from the appointing bodies. If these bodies are unable to respond in a timely manner, the Provost’s Office may select additional members from the appropriate groups.
B. Procedure to Initiate Appeal: To initiate Level II of the appeal, the student must file an appeal form with the Provost’s Office. This form must be filed within sixty (60) calendar days of the beginning of the semester immediately
following the semester in which the grade was received. The Provost’s Office may extend the 60-day limit only in unusual circumstances when equity demands it and when the student’s own procrastination or misunderstanding did not substantially contribute
to the delay. (Note: Grade appeals will not generally be processed during the summer. Therefore, the appeal of any grade received in the spring or summer sessions normally will be processed in the fall. A review will be scheduled in the summer only
when the student’s academic eligibility is jeopardized by the grade in question or when the student is preparing to graduate) The Provost’s Office will notify the appropriate dean, department chairperson, faculty member, and the president of the Graduate
Student Assembly of the student’s initiation of the Level II process.
C. Procedure to Process Appeal: The student will be expected to submit written documentation of his/her complaint, and the faculty member will be expected to submit in writing the course grading procedure and any other pertinent information.
Appeals based on discrimination will be reviewed according to current standards of nondiscriminatory action. Appeals based on capriciousness will be reviewed in light of the faculty member’s announced evaluation and grading system. The committee will
review the materials to deny or confirm appeal continuance. Denial of appeal continuance must be by a negative vote of four members of the committee. This committee will inform the Provost’s Office of its findings. Within five (5) class days of the
receipt of the committee’s report, the provost or designee will notify the student and the faculty member of the findings. If the basis for appeal is determined to be substantive, the provost or designee will schedule a Grade Review Panel within fifteen
(15) class days to be convened prior to the conclusion of the semester.
A. Composition: The Grade Review Panel will consist of five voting members: the vice provost’s designee (from the School of Graduate Studies and Research) and four faculty members. The Graduate Student Assembly Executive Committee designee
may advise as requested by the student. The affirmative action officer will advise in appeals based on discrimination. The panel will be constituted from the Grade Review Pool by random selection. The panel chairperson will be elected by and from
the panel before each review.
B. Membership: The Grade Review Pool will be established in the spring term to serve for the following academic year. Using random selection methods, the pool and rotational order within the pool will be established by the Provost’s
Office. A pool of three deans or associate deans and 12 full-time faculty members will be maintained. In establishing the membership for each review panel, prior to each review the names of those designated as primary members of the specific panel
and available as alternates will be supplied to all parties involved. A panel member may request (to the provost or designee) disqualification due to a conflict of interest. The student and the faculty member may eliminate names in proportion to the
composition of the panel. Each may eliminate only one dean/associate dean and four faculty members. The instructor and the student will be supplied a list of all primary and secondary pool members. The opportunity to disqualify panel members will
take place only once. Resulting vacancies will be filled from the appropriate pool of alternates so that the panel will be composed of one dean/associate dean and four faculty members. If through self-disqualification and challenges a panel cannot
be constituted from the pool, then the Office of the Provost will supplement the pool using appropriate random selection methods.
A. Continuing Rights: This appeal does not supplant any legal rights afforded by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and/or the government of the United States. Nothing in this policy abrogates or modifies any provisions
of or rights under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
B. Discrimination in this policy generally means unlawful discrimination: To the extent that any form of discrimination identified in this definition is not unlawful discrimination, this definition shall not be taken to create a cause
of appeal against the university. In such cases, the final appeal procedures stated in this policy will be final and binding on the student.
C. Tenure and Promotion Committee Membership on Grade Appeals Committees: Members of the universitywide tenure and promotion committees may not serve concurrently on grade appeals committees.
D. Support Mechanism: The Provost’s Office, after consultation with the Senate University-Wide Graduate Committee and APSCUF, will be responsible for identifying a pool of at least 10 faculty members well versed in the preparation of
grade appeals who will be available upon request to help students or faculty prepare documentation for the grade appeals process.
E. Training/Support: The Provost’s Office will offer yearly information sessions/workshops to assist deans, chairs, grade appeals panel/committee members, and members of the Graduate Student Assembly/University-Wide Graduate Curriculum
Committee in identifying issues and to provide guidance for the resolution of grade appeals.
F. Dissemination of Grade Appeal Information: The Provost’s Office will annually report to the university community a statistical summary of grade appeal data that does not compromise confidentiality including 1) the number of appeals
filed, 2) the resolutions at levels II and III, and 3) the final implementation of Level III decisions.
G. Appeals on Procedural Grounds: Decisions may not be challenged merely because the Provost’s Office fails to comply with Ancillary Provisions D, E, or F above.
H. Intentional Misrepresentation: Intentional misrepresentation in the filing of grade appeals by students will be referred to the university judicial system for students. Intentional misrepresentation by faculty in the grade appeals
process will be referred to the Provost’s Office.
I. Confidentiality: Students, faculty, administrators, and staff involved in processing and hearing grade appeals must respect the confidentiality of all aspects of these proceedings. Those breaching confidentiality subject themselves
to possible disciplinary action. This shall not abridge the First Amendment rights of the student appellant nor the instructor against whom the appeal has been filed.
J. Intended Purpose: The grade appeal procedures are designed simply as a means to resolve differences between students and faculty related to grading. Unless there is intentional misrepresentation, the results of a grade appeal may
not be used for disciplinary action of personnel.
K. Faculty Compensation: If a Review Panel (hearing) is scheduled at a time in the summer when any faculty member involved is not under contract, the faculty member will be compensated under terms mutually agreed upon at Meet-and-Discuss.
L. Review of Policy: Every five years, the Senate University-Wide Graduate Committee will review, in consultation with the campus community, the operation of the Grade Appeals Policy and recommend changes deemed appropriate.
M. Amendment: Amendments may be implemented upon concurrence by University Senate, APSCUF Representative Council, and Meet-and-Discuss.*
*Note: In the amendment process above, specification of University Senate implies the Council of Trustees’ role in approving Senate actions and recognizes the Council of Trustees’ final action to change policy.