6.5 UNIVERSITY APPEALS BOARD
6.5.1 FUNCTIONS OF THE UNIVERSITY APPEALS BOARD
6.5.1.1 Cases of Academic Offenses
See SR 6.4.5 [US: 3/10/86; US: 12/12/2005].
6.5.1.2 Cases of Grade Appeal – Role of Academic Ombud
See SR 6.2.1 [US: 9/12/11].
6.5.1.3 Cases of Student Academic Rights
[US: 12/8/86]
- * Pursuant to GR XI.C.4, in an appeal concerning student academic rights, the UAB has original jurisdiction to determine facts and then render a decision that applies the law of the Senate Rules. Pursuant to GR XI.C.4, when the Senate Rules limit the dispositional remedies available to the UAB in specific factual circumstances, then the UAB in such cases can only choose remedies from those prescribed by the Senate Rules. [SREC: 1/25/2014]
After hearing a case involving a violation of student academic rights as set forth herein (SR 6.1), the Appeals Board may select from the following remedies:
- The Appeals Board may direct that a student be informed about the content, grading standards, and procedures of a course when a violation of the pertinent rules (SR 6.1) has been proved.
- When an academic evaluation based upon anything other than a good-faith judgment of a student has been proved, the Board may direct that a student's grade in a course (SR 6.1.4.3) be changed to a W (Withdrawal) or a P (Passing, credit toward graduation but not toward grade point average (GPA)), or, if such determination can be made, to an appropriate letter grade. (See SR 5.1.2.) If the Appeals Board awards a student a P in the course, it shall appear on his or her record regardless of the fact that the student's college or academic unit does not normally recognize P grades. The educational unit must accept that course just as if the student had passed the course in the normal manner, except that the P grade is not used in calculating the student's GPA. [SREC: 11/20/87]
- * The University Senate has decided that it is reasonable for the UAB to change a course grade ONLY if the UAB first makes an official determination that the course grade was based on other than “good-faith judgment.” [SREC: 1/25/2014]
- * A faculty employee whose career is potentially harmed by an allegedly errant UAB factual determination that the Instructor made other than a “good-faith judgment” has recourse to the Senate Advisory Committee on Privilege and Tenure (SACPT, SR 1.4.3.1), because the SACPT is charged to consider the circumstances from a perspective different from the charge to the UAB. [SREC: 1/25/2014]
- The Appeals Board may take any reasonable action calculated to guarantee other student academic rights stated in the Senate Rules.
- * The qualification “other” here has the effect that SR 6.5.1.3, item 3 only applies to situations different from the specific factual circumstances that apply to SR 6.5.1.3, item 2. [SREC: 1/25/2014]
- * In its procedures for hearing cases and in its disposition of cases, the University Appeals Board must operate within the parameters established by the Governing Regulations and the University Senate Rules (GR XI.F, G; SR 6.5.2.4). These include the procedural parameters that a student can cause a case of grievance of violation of academic rights (SR 6.1) to reach to and be decided by the UAB (SR 6.5.1.2) only by the student having first lodged (SR 6.2.1) and processed (SR 6.2.1.3, SR 6.2.1.5) the grievance with the Academic Ombud. [SREC: 9/22/11]
- * Academic appeals by students enrolled in clinical residency or clinical fellow program are governed by AR 5:5, except, if the student is enrolled in and appealing a grade or academic matter in a Senate-approved course, then the appeal is governed by the University Senate Rules.