For information on the Faculty of Arts and Science appeals process please visit https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/undergrad-students/academic-appeals or drop by Dunning Hall, 1st floor. Faculty Regulations are regularly reviewed and may change at any time. The Calendar contains the most up-to-date version of the Academic Regulations.

The University Setting

The University environment is characterized by a spirit of free exchange and inquiry, and the appeal process should be carried out with this in mind. The appeal process should take into consideration the educational context and role of disciplinary proceedings. Educational hearings are not legal proceedings and should not resemble a courtroom. The proceedings should not be adversarial or prosecutorial; instead, they should be conducted in an environment of mutual respect. 

Educational hearings are not legal proceedings and should not resemble a courtroom. The proceedings should not be adversarial or prosecutorial; instead, they should be conducted in an environment of mutual respect. 

Procedural Fairness

Procedural fairness holds that:
1. Advance notice of consideration of a decision must be given to the student.
2. Student must have access to the information that is being considered.
3. Student must be given a meaningful opportunity to have their opinion heard and considered.
4. The decision maker must be impartial and unbiased.
5. The decision maker must give meaningful reasons for the decision or the outcome. 

The Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy

The Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy (SAAP) provides a procedural framework for proceedings in the Faculty of Arts and Science. The intent of this policy is twofold: 1) To ensure that students receive fair treatment and are aware of their rights and responsibilities; 2) To establish a fair, efficient process for addressing student appeals from academic decisions.

It is recognized that a decision-making body has the discretion to select among a number of reasonable alternatives. A “reasonable” decision is one that is rational in that its findings are based on evidence, thought out and supported by facts and logical inferences from findings of fact. To be reasonable, the decision must contain adequate reasons for the conclusions. A decision should be upheld if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes. Decision-making bodies shall not reverse a decision solely on the basis that it would not have made the same decision itself if it were exercising discretion. There is a considerable body of Canadian jurisprudence that helps define what constitutes review on the ground that a decision is not ‘reasonable’. 

The Academic Regulations for the Faculty of Arts and Science are designed to ensure that academic standards are upheld and that all students are treated fairly and equitably.

There are three levels of petitions and appeals within the Faculty of Arts and Science: 

• The instructor;
• The Office of the Associate Dean (Academic); and
• The Board of Studies.

These levels of appeal deliver a decision addressing the academic issues raised in the case. Information is available from the Arts and Science website, as well as the Arts and Science Faculty Office. 

Section 1: Academic Petitions

1.1 – Overview of Academic Petitions and Appeals

With the exception of grade reviews, a petition is a request to waive a particular academic regulation (see Petition Reg 1.8.1 for information on which regulations are subject to petition). The petitions process is otherwise referred to as a “Level One” request in the online portal. 

In general, with the exception of petitions related to grade reviews, petitions are only granted where there are significantly extenuating circumstances, which would merit the waiving of a particular Faculty regulation or decision. Extenuating circumstances normally involve a significant physical or psychological event that is beyond a student’s control and debilitating to their academic performance. These kinds of extraordinary situations should be supported by official documentation from a health care practitioner or other relevant professional.

Official documentation does not need to outline the specifics of the particular condition or matter affecting the student, but it must clearly indicate ways in which the extenuating circumstances directly affected the student’s performance in terms of timing and impact and should verify that these effects were substantial enough to cause the academic problem. Information on the start, duration and present state of the extenuating condition is critical to helping the instructor or Associate Dean (Academic) to make an informed decision. Further, a clear statement on whether the condition or circumstances have either improved or are being managed so that they will not have a significant detrimental effect on future academic performance is also essential.

The petitions process does not compensate for extenuating circumstances that the student is unable to resolve, or for which the student is unwilling to actively seek accommodation. In addition, the petitions process does not compensate for extenuating circumstances that are actively being accommodated, for example where a student’s permanent disabilities are being accommodated through Queen’s Student Accessibility Services. Multiple petitions or appeals citing the same extenuating circumstances will be reviewed very closely. This review may include, with the permission of the student, consultation with the appropriate professionals involved to obtain more detailed information.

1.2 – Submitting a Petition

Students must complete the Associate Dean (Academic) online petition form and include a letter outlining the nature of their concerns. The student must clearly explain the extenuating circumstances and their impact upon the student. The appropriate supporting documentation must be appended to the petition. 

1.3 – Reviewing the Petition

As part of the petition review process, instructors, department administrators or other persons who can provide information to determine the student’s eligibility for Credit standing or Aegrotat standing will be contacted and asked to supply information related to the student’s participation and performance in the class.  Instructors will be contacted to confirm support of petitions for Extensions of IN grades, Exam Deferrals, and Late Course Adds.

On occasion, these parties may also be contacted to confirm or respond to statements presented in the petition. If material in addition to that supplied by the student will be considered, the student will be advised of this material and will be given an opportunity to review and respond to that material.

1.4 – Deciding the Petition

In general, with the exception of petitions related to grading of term work where other criteria will apply, petitions to the Associate Dean (Academic) are only granted where there are significant extenuating circumstances, beyond the student’s control, that would merit the waiving of a particular Faculty regulation or decision. 

The Office of the Associate Dean (Academic) will inform the student in writing of the decision, normally within 15 business days after the date at which the petition is considered complete. 

1.5 – Limitation on Petitions 

1.5.1 – Who may Petition

Only students registered in the Faculty of Arts and Science are eligible to initiate a petition using the Faculty’s petition procedure (see the Senate Policy on Faculty Jurisdiction with Respect to Student Appeals of Academic Decisions). 

Students who have graduated from the Faculty of Arts and Science are not eligible to submit a petition of any kind after 15 business days of the conferral of their degree. For spring graduation, degrees are conferred on 1 June. For fall graduation, degrees are conferred on November 1. 

1.5.2 – Petitioning a Deadline

Exceptions to the petition deadlines can only be granted in cases where extenuating circumstances beyond a student’s control render the student unable to submit a petition or appeal within the specified timeline. The student must be able to show that the extenuating circumstances were ongoing. The student must also be able to demonstrate that these circumstances prevented the student from acting between the time the original decision was received and the time at which the appeal was eventually initiated. Petitions of the regulation governing the timeline for petitions must be submitted via the online portal. A petition of this type should include a presentation of the reasons for the delay and must include documents that support the reasons for this delay. 

Subsequent petitions cannot be submitted for a term that has already been the subject of a previous petition. 

1.6 – Petitions to the Instructor 

1.6.1 – Matters that may be Petitioned
The following matters may be petitioned to the instructor:
1. To request an informal review of instructors’ decisions on grading of term work or final examinations; and
2. To request to write the final examination for a class at a later time than formally scheduled (see Academic Regulation 8). 

1.6.2 – Submitting the Petition

Students should start by consulting the Grade Review Process guide for information on eligibility and deadlines: https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/faswww/files/Student%20Guide%20Grade%20Reviews.pdf. They should then contact the instructor by email to communicate the nature of their request and other relevant information to ensure that the instructor is aware of all the facts which the student believes are pertinent to the decision. This should be done as early as possible and must be done within 15 business days of communication of the grading decision to the student. 

1.6.3 – Decision of the Instructor 

The instructor will normally give a reconsidered decision within 15 business days of receiving the additional information that the student has presented. 

1.6.4 – Appealing the Decision of the Instructor 

A student may submit a petition to the Associate Dean (Academic) to facilitate a formal review of instructors’ decisions on grading of term work or final examinations.
See the Grade Review Process Guide for further information https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/faswww/files/Student%20Guide%20Grade%20Reviews.pdf 

The decision of the instructor regarding the petition to write the final examination at a later time than formally scheduled cannot be appealed. 

1.7 – Petitions to the Associate Dean (Academic): Level 1

1.7.1 – Matters that may be Petitioned 

1.7.1.1 – To Add a Class after the Last Official Date for Adding Classes

 A petition to add a class late must clearly demonstrate the significant extenuating circumstances, beyond the student’s control, which prevented them from making the addition by the deadline, as indicated in the Faculty’s Sessional Dates.  

A petition to add a class late must have support from the Undergraduate Chair of the relevant department and from the class instructor. 

If the class was full prior to the deadline and a wait list existed for the class, the student must have been at or near the top of the wait list for the class in order for the petition to be considered. There must currently be seats available in the course. 

A petition to add a class late must be submitted within 5 business days of the deadline to add a class for the specified term for Fall and Winter classes. 

1.7.1.2 – To Drop a Class after the Last Official Date for Dropping Classes 
A petition to drop a class late must clearly demonstrate the significant extenuating circumstances, beyond the student’s control, which prevented them from dropping the class by the deadline, as indicated in the Faculty’s Sessional Dates. A medical certificate or other documentation that outlines how the personal extenuating circumstances hindered the student’s ability to drop the class prior to the deadline should be provided with the petition. 

If the petition is successful, a grade of DR will be placed on the transcript. A student may not petition to remove a DR grade from the transcript.

Classes in which a student has received a passing grade may not be dropped. Instead, students with extenuating circumstances should consider a petition for credit (CR) standing (see Academic Regulation 10). 

Students may not petition to drop a class in which there is a pending investigation of a departure from academic integrity, or a finding of a departure from academic integrity that has resulted in a failure in the class. 

A petition to drop a class must be submitted within one year of the end of the term in which the class was offered. 

1.7.1.3 – To Request Aegrotat Standing in a Course
Aegrotat standing is reserved for a course in which a student who, because of illness or other extenuating circumstances beyond their control, is unable to complete all the work of the class. The majority of the work to be evaluated in the class (assignments, midterms, laboratories, final examination, as specified in the class syllabus) must be completed and the instructor must assert that the student has met the essential course learning outcomes. A medical certificate or other documentation that outlines how the personal extenuating circumstances affected the student’s academic performance must be provided with the petition. 

If this request is granted, the instructor will be asked to provide an estimated final grade (see Academic Regulation 10). If the student may be able to complete the remaining work at any point in the foreseeable future, they should instead consider a petition to extend the deadline to submit incomplete work or request a deferred exam instead. 

A petition for aegrotat standing must be submitted within one year of the end the term in which the class was offered. 

A student may be granted aegrotat or credit standing for a maximum of 36.0 units over the course of an entire degree program (see Academic Regulation 10). 

1.7.1.4 – To Request Credit (CR) Standing in a Course 
Credit standing is reserved for a course in which a student who has completed all of the work of the class, including the final examination, and achieved a passing grade in the class, but due to illness or other extenuating circumstances beyond their control, earned a substantially lower grade than might have been expected. Normally CR standing is only awarded for a grade of C or lower. A medical certificate or other documentation outlining how the personal extenuating circumstances affected the student’s academic performance must be provided with the petition (see Academic Regulation 10). 

A petition for credit standing must be submitted within one year of the end of the term in which the class was offered. 

A student may be granted aegrotat or credit standing for a maximum of 36.0 units over the course of an entire degree program (see Academic Regulation 10). 

1.7.1.5 – To Request an Extension of the Deadline to Submit Incomplete Work 
 As outlined in Academic Regulation 10, a student affected by extenuating circumstances may submit a request for academic consideration or ask the course instructor for incomplete standing (IN) for up to one full term after the completion of a class. If this request is granted, any further request to submit incomplete work after that term has elapsed must be made through a petition to the Associate Dean (Academic). A medical certificate or other documentation outlining how the personal extenuating circumstances prevented the student from completing the outstanding work by the end of the next term must be provided with the petition. 

The instructor will be consulted for their agreement to a further extension and stating a revised final date for completion of the course work in question must also be included. 

Normally such requests are considered if the student has participated actively in the class and only one or two elements of the course work have not been completed due to extenuating circumstances beyond the student’s control. 

Students with extenuating circumstances who have been unable to complete the majority of the work in a class should consider a petition to drop a class after the deadline rather than an extension of the deadline to submit incomplete work. 

A petition for the extension of the deadline to submit incomplete work must be submitted prior to the deadline for the submission of incomplete work.  

1.7.1.6 – To Request an Extension of an Exam Deferral 
As outlined in Academic Regulation 8, a student affected by extenuating circumstances who cannot write their exam as scheduled may submit a request for academic consideration and ask the course instructor for an exam deferral. It is the student’s responsibility to contact their instructor(s) to make arrangements for a deferred exam. The instructor may agree to a deferral for up to one full term after the completion of a class. If the student is unable to write the deferred exam at the same time due to the same or different extenuating circumstances, any further request for an additional exam deferral must be made through a petition to the Associate Dean (Academic). A medical certificate or other documentation outlining how the personal extenuating circumstances prevented the student from writing the deferred exam must be provided with the petition.
The instructor will be consulted for their agreement to a further deferral and confirmation of the new exam timeframe must also be included. If the instructor cannot support an extension of an exam deferral, the student may be encouraged to consider other petition options instead. 

A petition for an exam deferral must be submitted prior to the scheduled time of the deferred exam. 

1.7.1.7 – To Request to Take More Than 6.0 units of Courses on a Letter of Permission 
Students in good academic standing may submit a petition requesting to take more than 6.0 units at another institution on a Letter of Permission. The student's petition should directly address how taking courses at another institution is necessary due to unexpected extenuating circumstances or how the courses present the student with an exceptional academic opportunity not available at Queen's. 

If approved, the student must obtain a Letter of Permission prior to enrolling in courses at another university (see Academic Regulation 14.1). Note that no other part of Academic Regulation 14.1 may be petitioned. 

1.7.1.8 – To Request to Waive a Requirement to Withdraw for One Year 
A petition requesting that a requirement to withdraw be waived must clearly demonstrate how significantly extenuating circumstances, beyond the student’s control, affected their academic performance. In cases where the extenuating circumstances have been temporary, the student should indicate and document how the circumstances have been overcome and why the student is confident that they will not continue to be a factor in academic performance. In cases where the extenuating circumstances are ongoing rather than temporary, the student should also indicate and document how these personal challenges will be managed if the requirement to withdraw is waived. A medical certificate or other official documentation that demonstrates the impact of the extenuating circumstances must be provided with the petition. 

If the requirement to withdraw is waived, the Associate Dean (Academic) may impose conditions governing the student’s subsequent registration. In these cases, at the discretion of the Associate Dean (Academic), the student’s registration status may be changed from full-time to part-time, or the student may be required to seek the permission of the Associate Dean (Academic) in order to enrol in classes. 

A petition of the requirement to withdraw must be submitted within 15 business days of the receipt of the letter from the Associate Dean (Academic) informing the student of the decision that the student must withdraw. 

In all cases a notation indicating the requirement to withdraw will remain on the transcript, in accordance with the Senate’s Policy on Transcript Terminology for Students Withdrawing from Queen’s University. If the requirement to withdraw is waived, then a notation to that effect shall be added to the transcript. 

1.7.1.9 – To Request to Waive a Requirement to Withdraw for a Minimum of Three Years 
A petition requesting that a requirement to withdraw be waived must clearly demonstrate how significantly extenuating circumstances, beyond the student’s control, affected their academic performance. In cases where the extenuating circumstances have been temporary, the student should indicate and document how the circumstances have been overcome and why the student is confident that they will not continue to be a factor in academic performance. In cases where the extenuating circumstances are ongoing rather than temporary, the student should also indicate and document how these personal challenges will be managed if the requirement to withdraw is waived. A medical certificate or other official documentation that demonstrates the impact of the extenuating circumstances must be provided with the petition.  

If a student is within 12.0 units of completion of a degree, that student’s case will be reviewed by the Associate Dean (Academic) who may impose a lesser sanction. In exceptional circumstances, the continuation of academic probation may be imposed by the Associate Dean (Academic) as an alternative to requiring a student to withdraw. The special conditions which the student must meet in such instances will be determined by the Associate Dean (Academic) on an individual basis (see Academic Regulation 13).  

If the requirement to withdraw is waived, the Associate Dean (Academic) may impose conditions governing the student’s subsequent registration. In these cases, at the discretion of the Associate Dean (Academic), the student’s registration status may be changed from full-time to part-time, or the student may be required to seek the permission of the Associate Dean (Academic) in order to enrol in classes. 

A petition of the requirement to withdraw must be submitted within 15 business days of the receipt of the letter from the Associate Dean (Academic) informing the student of the decision that the student must withdraw. 

In all cases a notation indicating the requirement to withdraw will remain on the transcript, in accordance with the Senate’s Policy on Transcript Terminology for Students Withdrawing from Queen’s University. If the requirement to withdraw is waived, then a notation to that effect shall be added to the transcript. 

1.7.1.10 – To Facilitate a Formal Review of Instructors’ Decisions on Grading of Term Work and/or Final Examinations
A student may petition for a formal review of a grade assigned in a course subject to the marking scheme set out by the course instructor(s). No final course grades can be reviewed, only grades on individual assessments. 

For the Associate Dean (Academic) to facilitate a formal review, the student must:

1. Have received the decision of an informal review of the work by the instructor (see Academic Petitions and Appeals 3.2.1)

2. Demonstrate that at least one of the following grounds apply:

a. That the instructor did not adhere to the syllabus or the assignment instructions
b. That there was bias, error, or a discrepancy in marking
c. That the decision of the instructor in reviewing the work was not reasonable or did not follow procedural or relational fairness 

This request must be made within 15 business days of receiving the instructor’s decision in the informal review. 

Assessments that are not eligible for formal review include participation, oral presentation, live performances, group work, or any other practical, graded assessment that cannot be objectively reviewed after the fact by a third party. Grades assigned by peer review are also not eligible for formal review. Additionally, grade penalties on assessments (for being late, received incomplete due to technical issues or submission difficulties, etc.) are not subject to formal review. See the Grade Review Process Guide for further information https://www.queensu.ca/artsci/sites/faswww/files/Student%20Guide%20Grade%20Reviews.pdf

As part of the formal review, the Associate Dean (Academic) will forward the work to be reviewed to the Department Head or delegate with a request to facilitate the review. The Head (or delegate) will appoint two qualified reviewers. One of the two reviewers is normally the original instructor; however if the instructor is not available, or if the student can demonstrate bias or other conflict on the part of the original instructor, the Department Head (or delegate) may appoint any two reviewers with good knowledge of the course material. In such cases the original instructor may be asked to provide any documentation relevant to the review. Each reviewer will independently read the term work or examination. Where possible, the student’s identity will remain confidential from the reviewers (names and student numbers will be removed from the term work or examination). In matters where there is a discrepancy in grades between the reviewers, the Department Head (or delegate) will arbitrate the final grade, and will report the grade to the Office of the Associate Dean (Academic), usually within 10 business days of receiving the request. The Associate Dean (Academic) will then send the result of the review—the reconsidered grade—to the student. 

The reconsidered grade, which may be higher than or remain unchanged from the original grade, may not be appealed.

A student may appeal an instructor’s finding of a departure from academic integrity, the remedy or sanction, or both to the Associate Dean (Academic).

Section 2: Appeals of Petitions to the Board of Studies 

An appeal is a formal request to have the Associate Dean’s decision to deny a petition reviewed. The appeal process is otherwise referred to as a “Level Two” request in the online portal. A student may appeal the petition decision of the Associate Dean (Academic) to the Board of Studies with the exception of decisions of the Associate Dean (Academic) on matters related to appeals of grading of term work or final examinations are final. 

2.1 – Grounds for Appeal 

The grounds for submitting an appeal are limited to cases in which: 

i. The Associate Dean (Academic) whose decision is being appealed failed to act in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes failing to:

• ​ permit a student to be heard by an unbiased decision-maker;
• follow applicable rules, regulations, or University policy, in a way that adversely affects a student’s right to a fair process;
•  make a reasonable decision. A “reasonable” decision is one that is rational in that its findings are based on evidence, thought out and supported by facts and logical inferences from findings of fact. To be reasonable, the decision must contain adequate reasons for the conclusions. A decision should not be overturned if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes. If the decision is “reasonable”, the decision-maker deciding the appeal is not permitted to substitute their opinion for that of the decision-maker whose decision is under appeal. 

ii. The Associate Dean (Academic) whose decision is being appealed acted without, or exceeded their, jurisdiction. 

2.2 – Appeals to the Board of Studies (Level 2) 

2.2.1 – Submitting an Appeal

Appeals must be submitted to the Faculty of Arts and Science Board of Studies Coordinator within 10 business days of the date on the petition decision letter. Students must complete the Board of Studies appeal form online via the petition and appeal portal and include a letter that addresses the written statements made by the Associate Dean (Academic) in denying the petition. The student must explain the reason(s) for their appeal, based on one or more of the Grounds for Appeal set out in 2.1. 

2.2.1.1 – Requests to Submit a Late Appeal

Exceptions to the appeal deadlines can only be granted in cases where extenuating circumstances beyond a student’s control render the student unable to submit the appeal within the specified timeframe. The student must be able to show that the extenuating circumstances were ongoing and demonstrate that they prevented them from acting between the time the original petition decision was received and the time at which the appeal was eventually initiated. 

Requests to submit a late appeal should be emailed directly to ascbos@queensu.ca as early as possible. 

2.2.2 – Initial Review by the Associate Dean (Academic) 

An appeal packet is created with all the appeal information and documents. The Associate Dean (Academic) shall review the student’s appeal submission and determine if it contains new evidence that, through no fault or omission of the student, was not known by or available to the student when the prior decision was made. Upon review, the Associate Dean (Academic) may overturn their original decision or recommend the appeal proceed to the Board of Studies.

 If the appeal is not overturned, the appeal packet considered by the Associate Dean (Academic) in reaching a decision will be forwarded to the student for approval and they will have 5 days to approve the packet to ensure all documentation is present. Once approved by the student, it is forwarded to members of the Board of Studies for review prior to the meeting. 

2.2.3 – Appeal Contains New Permitted Evidence

The Chair of the Board of Studies shall not admit new evidence that is not part of the existing appeal file. If a student raises new evidence, the appeal should be referred back to the Associate Dean (Academic) for consideration as to whether the new evidence is admissible, unless: 

• the delay of sending the matter to the prior decision-maker would be unduly prejudicial to the student; or
• the student’s new evidence clearly demonstrates bias in the prior proceeding that otherwise cannot be remedied. 

The Associate Dean (Academic) shall have an opportunity to provide a written response to the new evidence within 10 business days. The student must be provided with any response material from the Associate Dean (Academic) and shall have at least 5 business days to review this material before a new meeting is held if the Associate Dean (Academic) approves the new evidence. An updated appeal packet containing the new evidence will be presented to the Board of Studies and a new meeting will be set unless the new evidence causes the Associate Dean (Academic) to amend their original decision. 

2.2.4 – If the New Evidence is Not Permitted 

If the evidence is not permitted, the Associate Dean (Academic) shall provide a written response to the student’s new evidence to the Board of Studies. The student must be provided with any response material from the Associate Dean (Academic) and shall have at least 5 business days to review this material before a meeting is held, or, if the student indicated that they do not want to meet, they shall have 5 business days after receiving the Associate Dean (Academic)’s response material to make additional written submissions to the Board of Studies. The Board of Studies meeting will then be rescheduled with an updated packet that contains responses from the Associate Dean (Academic) and the student, if applicable, regarding the inadmissible evidence. 

2.2.5 – Board of Studies Meeting  

If the student does not wish to meet with the Board of Studies, the student must indicate this in their appeal submission, and the appeal shall then proceed based on the appeal packet. If a student attends the meeting, the Associate Dean (Academic) will also attend. If the student does not attend the meeting, neither shall the Associate Dean (Academic). 

The Coordinator of the Board of Studies shall schedule a meeting as soon as reasonably possible. The student may have a support person (see SAAP sections 22 through 24) or an advisor present at the meeting. The Coordinator of the Board shall ask who, if anyone, will be present with the student, and advise the student whether anyone will be present with the Associate Dean (Academic). The student and the Associate Dean (Academic) shall have the opportunity to respond to the evidence orally at the meeting. 

2.2.6 – Deciding the Appeal 

After a careful review of the evidence, the Board of Studies, will act as a true appeal board to determine if the Associate Dean (Academic) failed to meet the standards of procedural fairness or if they exceeded their jurisdiction (see section 2.1). If grounds for appeal are present, then the decision shall be overturned. If not, the original decision will be upheld. 

The Board of Studies will email the student a formal letter within 10 business days of the meeting date. 

The decisions of the Board of Studies on academic matters are final. 

2.3 – Appeals to the University Student Appeal Board (USAB) 

In addition to the level(s) of appeal within each Faculty/School, the Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy establishes the University Student Appeal Board (USAB), has jurisdiction to hear appeals where the decision impedes a student’s academic standing (see SAAP section 42.i). In such cases, a student may appeal the final decision of the Board of Studies to the University Student Appeal Board.

2.3.1 – Submission of the Appeal 

Appeals must be submitted to the USAB within 2 weeks after the date of the official decision letter. During exam or holiday periods the Chair of the USAB will normally grant an extension of time for filing an appeal for the length of time the University was closed. 

The student may appeal to the USAB based on one or more of the Grounds for Appeal to USAB stipulated in the Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy. The student must follow the Starting an Appeal procedure set out in the Rules of Procedure for the University Student Appeal Board. 

The instructor or appeal decision-maker may consult with the University’s Legal Counsel about responding to an appeal to USAB. 

2.4 – Appealing the Same Matter 

Once an appeal has been decided by the Board of Studies, students may not petition the same matter to the Associate Dean (Academic). 

Section 3: Appeals on Matters Related to Academic Integrity 

The Faculty of Arts and Science academic regulations, policies, and procedures dealing with academic refer to the Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures (approved by Senate October 2021).

3.1 – Academic Integrity

The Queen’s University Senate Policy on Academic Integrity (“the Policy”) states that students, faculty, and staff have responsibilities to support and uphold the fundamental values of academic integrity: honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility and courage. The purposes of the Procedures are to: 

• affirm the University’s dedication to the values of academic integrity and the seriousness with which it treats departures; 
• protect the academic integrity of the University and the value of its courses, programs, and degrees; 
• explain the responsibilities of students, instructors, and staff; 
• ensure the rights of students are protected; and 
• ensure consistency among Faculties and Schools and the equitable treatment of students. 

In support of the concept of academic integrity, students have the responsibility to familiarize themselves with the rules and regulations of the Faculty. Additional information on academic integrity regulations, information for instructors and students and direction for appeals can be found in Academic Regulation 1. Appeals for issues of academic integrity are described in Academic Petitions and Appeals Section 2. 

3.2 – Grounds for Appeal 

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.1 and regulation 2.1 of this document. 

3.3 – Levels of Appeal 

There are two levels of appeal for matters related to academic integrity in the Faculty of Arts and Science:

Level 1: The O ice of the Associate Dean (Academic); and
Level 2: The Academic Integrity and Conduct Panel.

In a “level 1” appeal to the Office of the Associate Dean (Academic), the “decision-maker whose decision is being appealed” is the instructor. 

In a “level 2” appeal to the Academic Integrity Conduct Panel, the “decision-maker whose decision is being appealed” is the Associate Dean (Academic) or in the case of cross-faculty academic integrity cases where the Associate Dean (Academic) has been consulted on the sanction. 

In addition to the level(s) of appeal within each Faculty/School, the Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy establishes the University Student Appeal Board (USAB) has jurisdiction to hear appeals of the final academic integrity decision made within each Faculty/School. 

3.4 – Appeal to the Associate Dean (Academic): Level 1

A student may appeal an instructor’s finding of a departure from academic integrity, the sanction, or both to the Associate Dean (Academic). 

3.4.1 – Submitting an Appeal

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.3.1 

3.4.2 – Reviewing the Appeal 

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.3.2

In a level 1 appeal, the “appeal decision-maker” is the Associate Dean (Academic).

In a level 2 appeal, the “appeal decision-maker” is the Academic Integrity and Conduct Panel. 

3.4.3 – Meeting with the Student 

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.3.3

In a level 1 appeal, the “AI Administrator” is the Faculty of Arts and Science Academic Integrity Coordinator.

In a level 2 appeal, the “AI Administrator” is the Coordinator of the Academic Integrity and Conduct Panel.

3.4.4 – Deciding the Appeal

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.3.4 

3.4.5 – Informing the Student and the Instructor 

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.3.5 

3.5 – Appeal to the Academic Integrity and Conduct Panel: Level 2 

A student may appeal the decision of the Associate Dean (Academic) regarding the finding of a departure from academic integrity, the sanction, or both to the Academic Integrity and Conduct Panel. D

Refer to Queen’s University Academic Integrity Procedures section 4.4

A level 2 appeal uses the process set out in regulation 3.4 of this document.