Student Appeals Procedures

These procedures are governed by the Student Appeals Policy.

2.1 The responsible officer or committee handling an application for review or appeal will:

1. determine the matter on the basis of evidence brought forward by the student and/or the University, act fairly, and in accordance with the relevant policy and procedures;
2. give all relevant parties a copy of, or an opportunity to inspect, all documentation relevant to the subject matter of the application;
3. give the student the opportunity to make a case or response in writing and/or to appear before that person or committee;
4. give the parties at least five working days' written notice of the date, time and place of any meeting or hearing regarding the application;
5. permit a student, and any support person whom a student appoints under Section 6 of the policy, to be present at any meeting or hearing regarding the application, except where members of a committee wish to confer privately among themselves or to consider their decision;
6. conduct any meeting(s) or hearing(s) in closed session and treat the application in strict confidence, except as necessary for the discharge of that person's or committee's responsibilities, or as otherwise required by law.

2.2 Failure of the student and/or the student's support person to appear for discussion of any request for review or any appeal or to appear before any University officer or committee, at the time notified to them, will not prevent the relevant officer or committee from proceeding to investigate and determine the matter.

3.1 An application for review or an appeal must be supported by evidence.

3.2 Grounds for review or an appeal must be based on one of the following criteria:

1. alleged failure by a staff member or any other person to execute responsibilities under the relevant published University regulation, rule or policy;
2. other failure to adhere to the relevant published University regulation, rule or policy;
3. any penalty imposed which is inconsistent with the penalties available under the relevant University regulation, rule or policy.

3.3 Grounds for a review or appeal of any grade or result assigned are limited to:

1. an administrative error occurred in the determination of a final result;
2. the Unit Outline was not prepared in accordance with the Assessment Policy;
3. appropriate consideration was not given to an illness or misadventure that had been found to be ineligible for an extension of time for submission of an assessment task, a deferred examination or for special consideration;
4. the student had been disadvantaged in some way due to the way an assessment task is conducted; or
5. the student had been disadvantaged by a variation of the assessment requirements or feedback provisions laid out in the Unit outline.

3.4 An application which does not satisfy the grounds for review or appeal above will be dismissed.

3.5 Consistent with Section 5.4 of this procedure, failure by the student to make available to any stage of a review or appeal all relevant material reasonably available at the time is not adequate grounds for appeal against the decision on that application.

4.1 A student who is concerned with any academic or administrative decision, or who believes an error has been made, should consult with the person who made the relevant decision, to gain an understanding of the basis for the decision. Such consultation should normally be initiated by the student within 10 working days of being notified of the relevant decision.

4.2 A student who remains dissatisfied or unclear in relation to any academic or administrative decision within the scope of this Policy following initial discussion under Section 4.1, may submit, sequentially:

1. a formal application for review to a reviewing officer under Section 7; and
2. a procedural appeal to the Executive Dean or Director under Section 8; or
3. to the University Appeals Committee under Section 9 in the case of an appeal against a decision by an Executive Dean or the Provost under the Academic Integrity and Misconduct Policy or an appeal against a decision by an Associate Vice-Chancellor or Discipline Committee under the Student Conduct and Discipline Policy.

4.3 A student must complete the review process and then exhaust any lower level of appeal before proceeding to the next higher level.

5.1 Any formal application for review or appeal should be lodged by the student within 20 working days of notification of any decision in respect of which the application for review or appeal is lodged.

5.2 A formal application for review or appeal must:

1. be submitted using the relevant form;
2. provide the student number and contact details of the student;
3. set out the grounds for the application for review or appeal under Section 3.2;
4. provide details of the decision for which the application for review or appeal is being made;
5. state clearly how the University regulation or policy was not adhered to or the correct procedures were not followed;
6. in the case of lodgement after 20 working days of the notification of the decision, provide evidence of any compassionate or compelling circumstances which prevented submission in accordance with section 5.1; and
7. include evidence in support of the application. Normally certified copies of original documents should be submitted.

5.3 Resubmission of the original case for review as an application for procedural appeal without stating how the policy and/or procedures have not been followed during the formal review will not normally be accepted.

5.4 As identified in Section 3.4 of the policy, no new evidence or grounds for appeal based on such evidence, may be submitted during an appeal process, unless:

1. there has been a major change in circumstance following the lodging of the initial application which, in the view of the officer or committee handling the application, justifies the subsequent, exceptional submission of the evidence; and
2. the information or evidence has a significant bearing on the application and that information or evidence was not reasonably available at the time the appeal was first lodged.

5.5 Schedule 1 of this procedure identifies matters that may give rise to a review or appeal, and the responsible officers for each level of the process.

5.6 An application for formal review of a decision should be submitted on an Application for Review under Student Appeals Policy form to the responsible officer, normally the Course Coordinator or Manager in the relevant organisational unit.

5.7 A procedural appeal against a review decision of a senior officer conducted under section 6 should be submitted on an Application for Appeal under Student Appeals Policy form to:

1. the relevant Executive Dean in the case of an academic matter; or
2. the relevant Director in the case of an administrative matter.

5.8 An appeal to the University Appeals Committee must be submitted on an Application for Appeal under Student Appeals Policy form to the Academic Registrar. Appeals must be lodged by email to academicregistrar@acu.edu.au or by mail to PO Box 968 North Sydney NSW 2059.

In any case where a student’s application for review or appeal includes specific allegations against the conduct of a member of staff which might be in contravention of the Staff Code of Conduct, the officer receiving the application should refer to the relevant Executive Dean, or Academic Registrar, for a decision as to whether the matter should be considered under the Student Appeals Policy, the Student Complaints Policy or the relevant Human Resources Policy.

7.1 A Reviewing Officer may consider an application for review which has not been lodged within 20 working days from the date of notification of the decision where there is evidence of compassionate or compelling circumstances which demonstrates that the student could not submit the application within the 20 working days.

7.2 The reviewing officer, or nominee, will conduct the review. If that officer had previously been involved in the decision to which the review relates, the material will be referred to another staff member or other appropriate person nominated by that officer’s supervisor.

7.3 Within 10 working days of receipt of the application for formal review:

1. receipt of the application must be acknowledged in writing, outlining the process for the conduct of the review. In the case of an international student this is also a requirement of the ESOS Act and National Code; and
2. action will be initiated by the reviewing officer, or nominee to consider the application.

7.4 The reviewing officer, or nominee may:

1. interview staff involved in the decision-making;
2. interview the student, whether at the initiative of the officer or in response to the student’s written application for review.

7.5 The reviewing officer, or nominee may seek advice from other relevant staff and/or access advice and/or expertise from such other person(s) as they deem appropriate.

7.6 The reviewing officer will provide a report to the senior officer documenting the review to date together with a recommendation for decision. The senior officer is usually the Head of School, or equivalent, or Senior Manager in the relevant organisational unit.

7.7 Following receipt of the reviewing officer’s report, the senior officer will:

1. consider the report provided by the reviewing officer;
2. determine whether the application for review satisfies the grounds for review set out in Section 3, and whether there has been a failure of regulation, policy or procedure or that an error has been made; and
3. notify the student of the decision in accordance with Section 11.

8.1 An Executive Dean or Director may consider an application for procedural appeal which has not been lodged within 20 working days from the date of notification of the decision where there is evidence of compassionate or compelling circumstances which demonstrates that the student could not submit the application within the 20 working days.

8.2 Within 10 working days of receipt of the application for procedural appeal:

1. receipt of the application must be acknowledged, advising that the matter is under consideration. In the case of an international student this is also a requirement of the ESOS Act and National Code; and
2. action will be initiated by the Executive Dean or Director to consider the application.

8.3 The Executive Dean or Director may conduct the appeal solely on the basis of the application and any material accompanying it, but may conduct any further investigations as the Executive Dean or Director considers appropriate.

8.4 The Executive Dean or Director may seek advice from other relevant staff and/or access advice and/or expertise from such other person(s) as they deem appropriate.

8.5 If the Executive Dean or Director considers that the student’s appeal does not satisfy the grounds for appeal set out in Section 3, or does not establish that there has been a failure of regulation, policy or procedure or that an error has been made, the Executive Dean or Director may dismiss the appeal and will notify the student accordingly.

8.6 If the Executive Dean or Director considers that the subject matter of the appeal falls within the scope of the policy, satisfies the grounds for appeal set out in Section 3 or establishes that there has been a failure of regulation, policy or procedure or that an error has been made, the Executive Dean or Director may uphold the appeal and either:

1. set aside the review decision and substitute a new decision; or
2. refer the matter back to the senior officer to reconsider the review decision, including where the appeal introduces new evidence or new ground for appeal.

8.7 If the Executive Dean or Director considers that the procedural appeal introduces new evidence or new grounds for appeal and the associated information or evidence should be taken into consideration, the matter will be referred back to the level of the officer who undertook the initial review, for further consideration.

8.8 Following a determination on the procedural appeal, the Executive Dean or Director will notify the student of the decision on the appeal in accordance with Section 11.

8.9 Subject to Section 4 of this procedure, in the majority of cases the decision of the Executive Dean or Director will be final.

9.1 If the Academic Registrar considers that the student’s appeal does not fall within the scope of the policy, satisfy the grounds for appeal set out in Section 3 or does not establish that there has been a failure of regulation, policy or procedure, or that an error has been made, the Academic Registrar may dismiss the appeal and will notify the student accordingly.

9.2 If the Academic Registrar considers that the subject matter of the appeal does satisfy the grounds for appeal set out in Section 3 and does establish that there has been a failure of regulation, policy or procedure or that an error has been made on a subject matter under Section 4.2 then:

1. if the Academic Registrar considers the appeal introduces new evidence or new grounds for appeal under Section 5.4, they may refer the matter back to a lower level for determination;
2. if the Academic Registrar considers that that the appeal warrants reconsideration at a lower level, they may be refer it back to that lower level for determination;
3. in all other cases, they will refer the matter to a University Appeals Committee.

9.3 Action will be initiated in response to any application for appeal within 10 working days of receipt of the application by the Academic Registrar.

9.4 In all cases the Academic Registrar will acknowledge receipt of the appeal and notify the student of the course of action being followed in writing within 10 working days. In the case of an international student this is also a requirement of the ESOS Act and National Code.

9.5 The University Appeals Committee will comprise:

1. the Chair, appointed by the Chair, Academic Board;
2. two members of staff, at least one of whom must be an academic staff member, appointed by the Chair, Academic Board, or nominee;
3. one student appointed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education)

Normally a postgraduate student will be appointed in relation to an appeal by a postgraduate student, and an undergraduate student will be appointed in relation to an appeal by an undergraduate student.

9.6 The quorum for a meeting of a University Appeals Committee will be three persons including the student member.

9.7 A University Appeals Committee will not include any person who:

1. lodged a report which led to an investigation into the matter;
2. conducted any investigation or made any decision on the matter;
3. is responsible for any program or unit which is the subject of the appeal;
4. is responsible for any organisational unit providing administrative services of the type to which the appeal relates;
5. is otherwise directly involved in the circumstances of the matter under appeal; or
6. has given advice to the student in relation to the subject matter of the appeal.

9.8 A University Appeals Committee will:

1. be convened and conduct such investigations as it deems appropriate as expeditiously as possible, consistent with the requirement to act fairly;
2. proceed in a way that is appropriate to the circumstances of the case;
3. have access to all documentation used in the review and appeal processes and determine either to deal with the matter or to make some other recommendation(s) to the University;
4. in the event that it decides to deal with the matter, to reconsider the information and documentation used in the review and appeal processes, together with evidence presented by the University and/or the student, excluding any new evidence.

9.9 In the case of an appeal to the University Appeals Committee against a decision under the Student Conduct and Discipline Policy:

1. The support person appointed by the student in relation to an appeal may be a person with a qualification in law. In such proceedings, the support person may make submissions on the student’s behalf unless, in the opinion of the Chair of the Committee, the making of any such submission is or might be disruptive to, or may unreasonably extend, the proceedings.
2. The Academic Registrar on General Counsel’s advice may appoint a person with a qualification in law or a member of the staff of the University to represent the University at the hearing. The person appointed may call and examine witnesses and may also make legal and/or other submissions unless, in the opinion of the Committee, the making of any such submission is or might be disruptive to, or may unreasonably extend, the proceedings.

9.10 A University Appeals Committee may:

1. confirm or vary the decision appealed;
2. confirm or vary any penalty appealed;
3. determine that the appeal is upheld in whole or in part and refer the matter back to a lower level;
4. uphold the appeal in whole or in part; or
5. dismiss the appeal in whole or in part.

9.11 The Chair of the University Appeals Committee will provide a report on the Committee’s deliberations and decision to the Academic Registrar who will advise the student in writing of the decision on the appeal.

9.12 The decision of a University Appeals Committee is final and there is no avenue of appeal against the decision to any other person or body within the University.

10.1 Any staff member involved in the management of a student review or appeal that is subject to behaviour that may constitute unreasonable appellant conduct may refer the matter to the Academic Registrar.

10.2 Where the Academic Registrar determines that the behaviour constitutes unreasonable appellant conduct, the Academic Registrar may respond by taking any or all of the following actions:

1. limit contact with an appellant to a sole staff member;
2. limit or modify the forms and/or frequency of contact that the appellant can have with the University;
3. limit the length of documentation that will be accepted; and/or
4. prohibit further action on any review of appeal from the student without prior approval from the Academic Registrar.

10.3 Any action under section 10.2(d) should only be taken after consultation with the Office of General Counsel.

10.4 The Academic Registrar may refer the matter for consideration under the Serious Health Conditions Policy or the Student Conduct and Discipline Policy.

11.1 The student will be notified of the decision on any application for review or any level of appeal under this policy normally within 20 working days of the student's lodgement of the application for review or appeal at that level.

The student will be notified of:

1. the process undertaken to consider the application;
2. the decision on the application;
3. the reason(s) for that decision and any associated recommendation(s);
4. any penalty imposed and any conditions thereon;
5. the avenue of appeal available to the student.

11.2 In any case in which the matter has been referred to a University Appeals Committee, the student will be provided with a copy of the summary report of that Committee.

11.3 In the case of an international student whose enrolment has been terminated, the student will also be notified of the possible implications of the decision on the student's visa.

11.4 All documentation submitted by a student and all correspondence between the University and a student will be placed on the student’s file and will be disposed of according to the University's Retention and Disposal Schedule.

11.5 A copy of the decision on any application for review or any appeal will be provided, as relevant, to the decision maker(s) and/or such other officer(s) as may need to take action as a result of the decision.

11.6 Any action required of the University as a result of an outcome of an appeal must be initiated within 10 working days of the notification.

11.7 An annual summary and analysis of appeals must be tabled at Academic Administrative Committee (AAC) for noting by Academic Board.

The following tables detail the type of review and/or appeals covered by the Student Appeals Policy for academic and administrative matters, and the responsible officer for each level of the review and appeal. The review stage must be completed before proceeding to the appeal stage, and each appeal stage must be completed before proceeding to the next higher level of appeal.

Table 1: Academic Matters

Table 2: Administrative Matters