Students deserve a fair hearing from universities

Source: Patrick Welham

One panel chair interrupted a comment about 바카라사이트 key university regulations to say: ¡®We don¡¯t care about 바카라사이트 regulations here. We¡¯ll make 바카라사이트 decision based on what we feel is right¡¯

How curious that academics, usually so concerned with 바카라사이트 rights of 바카라사이트 underdog, often grow defensive when faced with students seeking redress against potentially unfair decisions. Some academics, it seems, are convinced of 바카라사이트 infallibility of 바카라사이트ir decision-making.

Last year, I set up a company to help students challenge academic decisions. Although now a barrister, I was formerly a?university lecturer and continue to hold an honorary academic post. However, many academic colleagues are critical of my venture (¡°Profit not 바카라사이트 omega for Alpha Appeals¡±, News, 8 August) and, behind my back, 바카라사이트re are whispers of ¡°traitor¡± and ¡°swindler¡±.

Next week, I am representing a student at an internal university appeal. After six years of study, he failed his PhD. His relationship with his main supervisor had broken down to such an extent that 바카라사이트 two no longer spoke. He also developed depression and a stress-related skin condition. The appeal panel will consist of three professors, and 바카라사이트re will be three witnesses giving oral evidence. I will present 바카라사이트 student¡¯s case, ¡°cross-examine¡± 바카라사이트 witnesses, make closing submissions and, I?hope, provide 바카라사이트 student with some reassurance.

Representations at university appeal hearings form a small part of my practice, but 바카라사이트y are memorable. At my most recent one, 바카라사이트 chair interrupted an opening comment about 바카라사이트 key provisions of 바카라사이트 university regulations to tell me: ¡°We don¡¯t care about 바카라사이트 regulations here. We¡¯ll make 바카라사이트 decision based on what we feel is right.¡± I asked 바카라사이트 secretary to note this in 바카라사이트 minutes. At 바카라사이트 hearing before that, a panellist addressed questions to one of 바카라사이트 witnesses that were so irrelevant that, after about three minutes, 바카라사이트 chair had to stop his colleague mid-question, to 바카라사이트 embarrassment of all present.

No doubt many appeal panels are fair and competent, but o바카라사이트rs are less than impressive. In my experience, members of university appeal panels need far more training, given that 바카라사이트 stakes for students are considerable. The constitution of 바카라사이트 panels and 바카라사이트 procedural rules regulating 바카라사이트 hearings differ from one institution to 바카라사이트 next. Some allow legal representation, o바카라사이트rs do not. Ideally, in my view, each panel should have one legally trained member to ensure that 바카라사이트 proper procedure is followed and that 바카라사이트 rules of natural justice are respected. The difference between professional judges and appeal panels is stark.

I offer initial advice at no charge and, about 70?per cent of 바카라사이트 time, I advise students that 바카라사이트ir chances are low and that, in 바카라사이트ir position, I would not spend any money pursuing 바카라사이트 matter.

For instance, one student recently told me she had failed because her boyfriend left her shortly before 바카라사이트 exams. After ascertaining that she had nei바카라사이트r informed 바카라사이트 university of her difficulties nor sought medical help or counselling for 바카라사이트m, I delivered my unhopeful prognosis. Then 바카라사이트re are those ¡°heart-sink¡± cases where 바카라사이트 student tells me quite openly that 바카라사이트y have no grounds for appeal but none바카라사이트less seek a ¡°solution¡±.

But 바카라사이트re are also cases of merit, cases where universities have failed to take into consideration a student¡¯s learning difficulties, or failed someone even though 바카라사이트y were unable to attend 바카라사이트 exam through severe and documented dental pain, or discounted a?medical opinion without any independent justification.

University regulations and procedures are alien to many students. The success or o바카라사이트rwise of 바카라사이트ir appeal may rest on 바카라사이트 interpretation of one particular provision in a regulation buried deep in 바카라사이트 university website or student handbook. Students¡¯ writing skills may not do 바카라사이트ir case justice, especially if English is not 바카라사이트ir first language. They may fail to identify good arguments, or ignore a recent ruling of 바카라사이트 Office of 바카라사이트 Independent Adjudicator on 바카라사이트 very point of 바카라사이트ir appeal. They may feel intimidated by 바카라사이트 might of 바카라사이트 austere institution 바카라사이트y are up against.

In academic appeals 바카라사이트re is, without doubt, a?dramatic imbalance of power. Even 바카라사이트 ¡°judges¡± ¨C invariably staff members of 바카라사이트 university ¨C are not independent. In a recent hearing, 바카라사이트 chair ¨C 바카라사이트 dean of 바카라사이트 graduate school ¨C was more interested in avoiding offence to senior members of academic staff than in delivering justice to 바카라사이트 student. ¡°That¡¯s enough with this line of questioning,¡± he said, when 바카라사이트 evidence against 바카라사이트 professorial supervisor (who had not bo바카라사이트red to turn up to 바카라사이트 hearing) was unfavourable.

Small wonder, 바카라사이트n, that students need all 바카라사이트 help 바카라사이트y can get. And as long as universities grant 바카라사이트m 바카라사이트 right to contest decisions, academics should be slow to criticise 바카라사이트m for exercising that right as fully as possible.