Sign-in Links
Class of 2025
For students beginning the Full-Time MBA program (FTMBA) in January 2024.
1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of the Academic Calendar is to acquaint students with the academic requirements, regulations, policies, procedures and expectations of the Smith Full-Time MBA Program (FTMBA). It is the responsibility of the student to read and understand the entire Academic Calendar. Questions about any of its contents should be directed to the Program Director.
1.2 Acknowledgement of Territory
Queen’s University in Kingston is situated on traditional Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee Territory. To acknowledge this traditional territory is to recognize its longer history, one predating the establishment of the earliest European colonies. It is also to acknowledge this territory’s significance for the Indigenous peoples who lived, and continue to live, upon it – people whose practices and spiritualities were tied to the land and continue to develop in relationship to the territory and its other inhabitants today. The Kingston Indigenous community continues to reflect the area’s Anishinaabek and Haudenosaunee roots. There is also a significant Métis community and there are First Peoples from other Nations across Turtle Island present today.
2: PROGRAM CURRICULUM AND GRADING
2.1 Jurisdiction
Students of Smith School of Business at Queen’s University are governed by the regulations, policies and practices of this institution.
Degree Students are enrolled at Queen’s University and are therefore subject to the policies, regulations, and requirements of Queen’s. Students going on exchange are also subject to the policies, regulations and requirements of their exchange university for courses taken at that university.
It is the responsibility of every student in the Program to read and understand these policies, regulations, and requirements as well as those of their home, and exchange universities.
2.2 Program Format
The Queen’s Program is approved by the Senate and Board of Trustees of the University, and by the Ontario Council for Graduate Studies. Upon graduation, students receive a Master of Business Administration Degree.
The Smith MBA program provides students with the optimal balance of technical skills and the professional competencies employers are looking for.
2.2.1 Program Delivery
The Smith Full-Time MBA program holds classes five days a week at Goodes Hall on the Queen’s University campus in Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
2.3 Timeframe
Once registered in the Program, the student is expected to complete all degree requirements without interruption. The Program is normally completed in 12 consecutive months, beginning in January and ending in December. Foundations (core) curriculum is undertaken from January to June each year. From late June to December, students select elective courses to compliment and customize their MBA experience.
2.4 Degree Requirements and Courses
The Smith Full-Time MBA Program is a 12-month program in which students complete the equivalent of 60 units, including the equivalent of 39 required units and 21 elective units. To be eligible for graduation, students must complete all courses in the Program in the year in which they are registered, and uphold and/or meet each of the Academic Regulations (Section 4 of this document).
2.4.1 Required and Elective Courses
All required and elective courses for the Program must be completed at Queen’s, or at an approved partner institution, in the year that the student is registered in the Program.
Students must adhere to the Program’s add/drop policy and deadlines for any changes to course registrations. The Program Sessional Dates include applicable add/drop dates.
The add/drop policy of the host university will apply for courses taken at partner institutions.
2.4.1.1 Required Courses
All students must complete the following required courses in accordance with the Academic Regulations and Standing set out in Section 4 of this document.
MODULE ONE
MBAS 834 Communications & Professional Skills
MBAS 850 Leading With Integrity
MBAS 811 Financial Accounting
MBAS 860 Business Analytics
MBAS 851 Negotiations & Conflict Management
MBAS 890 Integrated Project
MBAS 894 Career Services Course
MODULE TWO
MBAS 852 Managing Human Capital
MBAS 821 Finance Fundamentals
MBAS 832 Business & Corporate Strategy
MBAS 801 Economics and Industry Analysis
MBAS 854 Business, Government & the Global Economy
MODULE THREE
MBAS 840 Managing Information Technology
MBAS 831 Marketing Fundamentals
MBAS 841 Operations & Supply Chain Management
2.4.1.2 Elective Courses
Students must complete 21 elective units in the Program.
MBAS 843 New Venture Management
MBAS 883 Dynamic Strategy Analysis
MBAS 839 Strategic Problem Solving & Insights
MBAS 822 Finance Strategy
MBAS 871 Financing of New Ventures
MBAS 846 Digital Transformation
MBAS 812 Management Accounting
MBAS 802 Organizational Intelligence & Strategy
MBAS 823 Corporate Valuation & Mergers and Acquisitions
MBAS 844 Managing Agile Projects
MBAS 836 Creating & Executing Market-Based Strategy
MBAS 835 Consumer Focused Marketing
MBAS 861 Analytical Decision Making
MBAS 853 Strategy Implementation & Change
MBAS 824 Investments to Advanced Portfolio Management
MBAS 881 Global Strategy
MBAS 837 Sales Management
MBAS 842 Digital Execution
MBAS 803 Decision-Making in Competitive Environments
MBAS 855 Diversity and Inclusion in Organizations
MBAS 893 Tri-Colour Venture Fund
MBAS 891 Individual Project Course (Mandatory)
2.4.2 Other Components
Students must complete a Career Services Course, in which students receive a pass or fail grade.
2.4.3 International Exchange
Students must be in Good Academic Standing (see Section 4) to participate in an international exchange.
2.4.3.1 Transfer Credits
Students are granted transfer credits that indicate an unspecified (UNSP) Queen’s equivalent to the courses taken on exchange (MIB course = MGBL UNSP; MBA course =MBAS UNSP), as well as the equivalent weight of the courses. Specific grades earned on exchange are not shown on the Queen’s transcript. Students receive a transcript from the host institution which includes course names and grades.
2.4.4 Course Substitutions
Students must complete all required and elective courses at Queen’s (or approved partner institution) within the required timeframe to graduate from the Program.
If extenuating circumstances prevent a student from completing the Program in the required timeframe, the student will be required to complete outstanding courses as directed by the Program Director or Academic Progress Committee. Normally, if one or more of the missed courses is not offered again in the year the student is registered in the Program, the student will be permitted to take the course in the subsequent year when the course is offered again.
2.4.5 Credits Earned Toward an MBA
The Curriculum for the Graduate Diploma in Business (GDB) consists of eight – ten courses, all of which may be applied as credit courses towards completion of an MBA degree from Smith School of Business, Queen’s University under the Full-Time MBA program.
A graduate of the Smith School of Business Graduate Diploma in Business must meet the following in order to continue into the Smith Full-Time MBA Program:
- Have successfully completed the Program and received a Graduate Diploma in Business;
- Meet the requirements for admissions to the Full-Time MBA program in place at the time of application to the Full-Time MBA program;
- Have a minimum GPA of 2.7 in the Graduate Diploma in Business; and
- Not have violated any of the Academic Regulations of the GDB Program.
Some of the courses in the Graduate Diploma in Business may, subject to meeting requirements of admission to a graduate level program offered by Smith School of Business, be applied towards credit in other graduate degree programs offered by Smith School of Business.
Credits earned in the GDB will be valid for a maximum period of 10 years from the date earned to the date applied, in accordance with the terms above, towards credit to a graduate degree offered by Smith School of Business.
Tuition for any graduate degree that a student pursues will be adjusted to take into account fees paid for units earned in the Graduate Diploma in Business.
2.4.6 Auditing Courses
A student may request to audit a course. A formal written request to audit must be made to the Program Director at least seven days before the first session of the course to be audited. Requests to audit courses will be considered depending on space, professor approval and other relevant course-specific factors.
2.5 Learning Teams
Learning Teams are a foundation of the Smith Full-Time MBA Program. The Learning Team is critical to a student’s success in the Program as well as being a means of managing the demanding workload of the Program. It also provides an opportunity to draw on the varied backgrounds and expertise of other team members and enriches the student’s learning experience as a whole. Most courses allocate approximately 50% of the course weight to teamwork.
Students are assigned to a Learning Team at the beginning of the Program. It is a Program requirement that students function effectively and supportively within their Learning Teams and make effective and ethical use of team resources in satisfying course requirements. Learning Teams remain intact for the first six months (core) of the Program; however, additional “teams” are formed for elective courses in the Program.
2.5.1 Performance in the Learning Team
Performance in the Learning Team is an academic requirement for successful completion of the Program (see Section 4.1). Students must perform effectively and supportively on the Team according to the standards and norms of the Team. Failure to do so can result in a requirement to withdraw from the Program.
2.5.2 Team Coaches
In order to get the best experience on the Learning Team, each team is assigned a professionally trained Team Coach. The Team Coach works regularly with the team and its individual members throughout the Program delivering best practices, instruction, advice, and coaching on team processes, development, and performance. Team coaches may also work with a team on interpersonal issues or concerns with regard to the performance (effectiveness) or behaviour (supportiveness) of individual team members.
2.6 Grading
2.6.1 Queen's University Grading
The grading system for courses in the Queen's Program is:
Other academic entries which may be assigned are:
* Aegrotat: An academic entry which provides an estimated final grade or, if that is not possible, credit for a course without a grade because of extenuating circumstances beyond the student’s control that prevented the student from completing all work of the course, particularly the final examination. Normally at least 60 per cent of the work to be evaluated in the course (assignments, midterms, final examination, as specified in the course) must have been completed.
Requests for AG or CR standing should be made to the Program Director.
2.6.2 Grading Specifications
All final marks, including those assigned after special examinations, may be based on the results of formal examinations and on grades obtained from other work throughout the course, which may include essays, exercises, reports, presentations, class tests/quizzes, and class participation or other work.
At the beginning of each course, the professor will provide a clear statement of the basis on which the final mark will be assessed. All work assigned and the weight that it will contribute to the final mark will be specified. Normally there is both individual and team work included in course assessments.
2.6.3 Class Participation
Class participation grades are allocated in some courses. Professors will specify the specific form and opportunities for participation marks at the start of the course. Some examples include contributions to class discussions or discussion boards, attendance, timely completion of assigned work, or other relevant behaviors determined by the professor.
3: ACADEMIC REGULATIONS AND STANDING
Academic Regulations exist to maintain the standards of the Program, and to ensure the candidates of the Program have the mandatory knowledge and experience to merit receiving the Degree. Degrees are awarded according to the requirements and processes set out in the Academic Regulations.
Every student is responsible for knowing and meeting or upholding the Academic Regulations of the Program in order to progress through the Program and ultimately be eligible for the Degree. The Academic Regulations below are currently in effect. Regulations are consistently reviewed and may change from time to time. Any changes that take place during the academic year will be communicated to students; it remains the student’s responsibility to be aware of any such changes.
3.1 Academic Regulations
Each candidate for the Degree must successfully meet or achieve the Regulations below in order to be in Good Academic Standing, to progress through the Program, and to be eligible for graduation from the Program. In a case where a student violates any one of the Regulations, that student is normally required to withdraw from the Program (see Section 4.2 for further information).
Every student must achieve the following:
3.1.1 Complete Program Curriculum
The student must complete all components of the curriculum as outlined in Section 2.
3.1.2 Overall Minimum GPA
The student must achieve a cumulative GPA of at least 2.7 (B-) including all courses taken in the Program.
3.1.3 Minimum Course Grades
The student may obtain final grades of less than 2.0 (C) in no more than the equivalent of 2 courses (6 units) throughout the Program.
3.1.4 No Failures
The student must obtain a final grade of at least 0.7 (D-) in all courses.
3.1.5 Pass Individual Performance
The student must obtain a grade of at least 0.7 (D-) in the assessment of individual performance of any course. Course professors will determine how individual performance is assessed in their course.
3.1.6 Pass Team Performance
The student must obtain a grade of at least 0.7 (D-) on the assessment of team performance of any course. Course professors will determine how team performance is assessed in their course.
3.1.7 Function in Learning Team
The student must function effectively and supportively in the Learning Team throughout the duration of the Program. The Program Director will determine whether the student is functioning effectively and supportively as per Section 3.2.2.1.
3.1.8 Attendance
The student may not miss more than 25% of class sessions of any course.
Class attendance is monitored, and concerns related to attendance will be addressed with the student. Note that repeated unexcused absences from class may also impact the assessment of performance in the Learning Team.
3.2 Academic Standing
Faculty boards or delegated bodies have jurisdiction to deal with issues of Academic Standing. Subject to a student’s right of appeal, if a student is not meeting the requirements of their program, a faculty board has the authority to issue a Requirement to Withdraw for Academic Performance, indicating the required transcript notation in accordance with the Policy on Transcript Terminology for Students Withdrawing from Queen’s University.
Academic standing means the standard used to determine or measure a student’s eligibility to remain and/or progress in a program, as determined by the academic regulations of the student’s Faculty, School or program. The following Academic Standings may apply, depending on individual circumstances:
3.2.1 Good Academic Standing
In order to progress through the Program and to be eligible for the Degree, a student must be in Good Academic Standing. A student is considered to be in Good Academic Standing when they uphold the Academic Regulations set out in Section 3.1 above.
A student who fails to uphold any one of the Academic Regulations is no longer in Good Academic Standing, and is normally required to withdraw from the Program. The student is considered to be in Academic Jeopardy until a decision is made by the appropriate body.
3.2.2 Academic Jeopardy
A student who fails to meet one or more of the Academic Regulations is deemed to be in Academic Jeopardy until a decision is made about their situation by the appropriate body.
Students in this situation will first be reviewed by the Program Director. In some cases, an informal resolution may be possible (for example, an opportunity to re-take an exam if the student has official evidence of being gravely ill on the day of the exam) and, if successful, the student may return to Good Academic Standing.
In cases where an informal resolution is not possible, the Program Director will inform the student in writing of the requirement to withdraw from the Program, subject to the student’s right of appeal to the Academic Progress Committee (Section 6, Academic Decisions and Appeals).
3.2.2.1 Academic Jeopardy Resulting from Failure to Function in the Learning Team
As established in the Academic Regulations, Section 3.1.6 Function in Learning Team, a student must function effectively and supportively in the Learning Team (Section 2.5) throughout the duration of the Program. Effective and supportive behaviour as a team member includes meeting the standards of performance and behaviour determined by the Team in conjunction with the Team Coach, as well as full cooperation and responsive communication with the Team Coach.
When significant concerns regarding a student’s Learning Team performance is brought to a Team Coach, the Team Coach will investigate the situation fully and fairly. The Team Coach will:
- Discuss the situation with each student on the Learning Team, including the student whose performance or behaviour is in question.
- Identify the Learning Team’s established performance, operational and behavioural norms and expectations.
- Discuss with the student in question any failure to meet the team norms or expectations, and, if necessary:
- Establish a set of formal expectations, in the form of a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) that must be achieved by the student within a specified period in order to fulfill the obligation to perform as an effective and supportive team member.
A student operating under a formal set of performance expectations outlined in a PIP is in Academic Jeopardy. If the student successfully completes the PIP, the student is once again considered to be in Good Academic Standing.
If, after a thorough investigation, the Director of Team Coaching determines that the student has not successfully completed the PIP, the Director of Team Coaching will refer the matter to the Program Director for review. If the student is deemed to have violated Regulation 3.1.6, the student will be required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal to the Academic Progress Committee (Section 6).
3.2.3 Academic Probation
A student who has failed to meet one or more of the Academic Regulations, and who has successfully appealed to the Academic Progress Committee (Section 6) may be permitted to continue in the Program, on Academic Probation, subject to specific terms, conditions, standards and timeframes tailored to the situation.
A student who successfully completes the conditions of their Academic Probation will be released from Academic Probation and return to Good Academic Standing. A student who fails to meet the conditions of their Academic Probation will normally be required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal (Section 6).
3.2.4 Requirement to Withdraw
A student who has failed to meet any one or more of the Academic Regulations is normally required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal (see Section 6). Further, a student who fails to meet the conditions of their Academic Probation will normally be required to withdraw from the Program.
3.2.5 Effective Date of Sanctions, Penalty, or Requirement to Withdraw
Sanctions or adverse academic decisions, such as Academic Probation (and its terms and conditions), penalties or a requirement to withdraw, shall take effect in accordance with Sections 33 and 34 of Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Academic Appeals Policy:
(33) Ordinarily, no sanction, penalty, or requirement to withdraw shall be put into effect until the student affected has either exhausted all channels of appeal or the time for filing an appeal has expired and no appeal has been filed. For the purpose of this provision, the University will normally consider an adverse academic decision to be a sanction.
(34) Notwithstanding paragraph 33, if an academic unit determines that the interests of third parties may be prejudiced by the continued enrolment of a student in a course or program, the unit may decide that, pending an appeal from an adverse academic decision, the student should not be permitted to continue in their course or program or should be precluded from progressing to the next academic stage. A student who is subject to an immediate sanction under this paragraph may request that the Chair of the appellate body with jurisdiction over the matter expedite the appeal. This request may result in a direct abridging the time for filing of documents, or other interim or preliminary directions.
The Commentary to s.34 reads:
Some academic experiences involve student interaction with third parties or may be subject to laws and regulations such as those governing professions (such as those subject to the Regulated Health Professions Act and the Medicine Act). For example, and without limiting other possible circumstances, there are placement requirements in Education and mandated clinical placements in the Schools of Medicine, Nursing, and Rehabilitative Therapy, where the interests of third parties would justify immediate suspension of a student from a course or portion of a program pending the outcome of an appeal process. In programs involving intensive group work, the interests of other students might also justify such a suspension pending the outcome of an appeal process.
3.2.5.1 Effective Date Of Sanctions for Failure to Function in the Learning Team
The Program Director may determine that an adverse academic decision (e.g., requirement to withdraw) as a result of the violation of Regulation 4.1.6 (Function in the Learning Team) requires that a student’s participation in the team be halted during the appeal process to ensure that the interests of third parties (e.g., the learning experience and academic evaluation of the other members of the Learning Team) are not adversely affected. The student may be permitted to continue in the Program to the extent feasible until all levels of appeal are exhausted. However, in certain circumstances, the student may not be permitted to continue in the Program in accordance with SAAP s.34.
4: ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS
4.1 Academic Integrity
Queen’s University is dedicated to creating a scholarly community free to explore a range of ideas, to build and advance knowledge, and to share the ideas and knowledge that emerge from a range of intellectual pursuits.
Queen’s students, faculty, administrators, and staff therefore all have responsibilities for supporting and upholding the fundamental values of academic integrity. Academic integrity is a commitment to the fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility. Academic integrity concerns refer to issues that arise which deserve attention, and which may or may not, in the end, involve a departure from academic integrity, that is, a departure from these fundamental values. This involves what has traditionally been referred to as academic dishonesty but encompasses a much broader context to include educational measures associated with academic integrity. Academic integrity is constituted by the five core fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility (see Academic Integrity Policy) and by the quality of courage. These values and qualities are central to the building, nurturing and sustaining of an academic community in which all members of the community will thrive. Adherence to the values expressed through academic integrity forms a foundation for the "freedom of inquiry and exchange of ideas" essential to the intellectual life of the University.
The following statements from “The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity” (2nd edition), developed by the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI), contextualize these values and qualities:
Honesty: Academic communities of integrity advance the quest for truth and knowledge through intellectual and personal honesty in learning, teaching, research, and service.
Trust: Academic communities of integrity both foster and rely upon climates of mutual trust. Climates of trust encourage and support the free exchange of ideas which in turn allows scholarly inquiry to reach its fullest potential.
Fairness: Academic communities of integrity establish clear and transparent expectations, standards, and practices to support fairness in the interactions of students, faculty, and administrators.
Respect: Academic communities of integrity value the interactive, cooperative, participatory nature of learning. They honor, value, and consider diverse opinions and ideas.
Responsibility: Academic communities of integrity rest upon foundations of personal accountability coupled with the willingness of individuals and groups to lead by example, uphold mutually agreed- upon standards, and take action when they encounter wrongdoing.
Courage: To develop and sustain communities of integrity, it takes more than simply believing in the fundamental values. Translating the values from talking points into action -- standing up for them in the face of pressure and adversity — requires determination, commitment, and courage.
Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with and adhering to the regulations concerning academic integrity. General information on academic integrity is available at Academic Integrity - Queen's University, along with School specific information in the Smith Academic Integrity Policy.
4.1.1 Departures from Academic Integrity
A departure from academic integrity involves any departure from the six fundamental values described above and includes any deliberate attempt to gain unfair advantage academically for oneself or others. All forms of departure from academic integrity are considered serious offences within the University community. Faculty boards or their delegated bodies have jurisdiction to deal with issues of academic integrity concerns and to impose sanctions when they find a departure from academic integrity has occurred. Departures from academic integrity other than a course-related issue (e.g., falsifying a transcript) are dealt with by the Faculty/School in which the student is registered. The Smith Academic Integrity Policy governs academic integrity processes at the Smith School of Business. The following defines the domain of relevant acts without providing an exhaustive list:
4.1.1.1 Plagiarism
Allowing it to be thought that another's ideas or phrasings are one's own by failing to provide proper acknowledgement. Some examples are:
- Copying and pasting from the internet
- Copying a printed source or other resource without proper acknowledgement
- Copying from another student in the same or different year of the Program or another Program
- Copying from another’s test paper
- Using direct quotations or large sections of paraphrased material in an assignment without appropriate acknowledgement
- Buying term papers or other assignments and submitting them as one's own
- Submitting the same piece of work in more than one course without the permission of the instructors
- Obtaining a copy of, or information about, a test or exam from an earlier section of the course and writing the test or exam later in the day or subsequent days.
4.1.1.2 Use of unauthorized materials
- Possessing or using unauthorized study materials or aids during a test
- Copying from another's test paper
- Using an unauthorized calculator or other aids during a test
- Unauthorized removal of materials from the library, or deliberate concealment of library materials
- Obtaining materials such as answer keys and using them to obtain an unfair advantage.
4.1.1.3 Facilitation
- Enabling another's breach of academic integrity
- Making information available to another student, such as knowingly allowing one's essay or assignment to be copied by someone else, giving a copy of a test or exam to a student writing the same test or exam later in the day or subsequent days
- Selling or distributing term papers or other assignments
- Knowingly assisting another person to conceal their departure from academic integrity.
4.1.1.4 Unauthorized collaboration
- Working with others, without the specific permission of the instructor, on assignments that will be submitted for a grade
- This applies to in-class or take-home tests, papers, or homework assignments. Students may not collaborate without the instructor’s authorization.
4.1.1.5 Forgery
1. Utilizing counterfeit documents or statements (e.g. creating or altering a transcript, medical note or other official documents).
4.1.1.6 Falsification
- Misrepresentation of one's self, one's work or one's relation to the University
- Altering transcripts or other official documents relating to student records
- Impersonating someone in an examination or test
- Submitting a take-home examination written, in whole or in part, by someone else
- Fabricating or falsifying research data or source material (whether by commission or by omission)
- Allowing someone else to do research work without the knowledge and approval of the instructor
- Failing to appropriately recognize contributions of others
- Attributing authorship of work to persons other than those who have contributed to the work in a meaningful way.
4.1.2 Process for Investigating Suspected Departures from Academic Integrity
The Smith School of Business Academic Integrity sets out complete procedures and processes for handling suspected departures from academic integrity. Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with the Queens and Smith School of Business Academic Integrity policies.
The following outlines the steps to follow in investigating possible departures from academic integrity and making findings. There are four steps to this process:
- Collection of evidence
- Investigation of possible departure from academic integrity
- Assessment of sanction, and
- Students may appeal a finding of a departure from Academic Integrity.
To begin investigating a possible departure from academic integrity, the instructor assembles all documents related to the case. While collecting evidence, the instructor can seek guidance from the Smith Dean's office concerning matters relating to departures from academic integrity and the Smith Academic Integrity policy. When discussing possible departures from academic integrity, the instructor ensures that the student's identity remains confidential, pending a finding of departure from academic integrity.
Normally, where a course professor has a concern about a possible departure from academic integrity, the professor will notify the student in writing (via a Notice of Investigation – “NOI”) and investigate in accordance with Smith School of Business Investigation of possible departure from academic integrity procedures .
Within 10 days of receiving the NOI, the student must make an initial response to the instructor, either to schedule a meeting or to indicate that he/she does not wish to meet and will provide a written response. If the student wishes to meet, the instructor should ask who else, if anyone, will accompany the student. If the student appears with legal counsel without prior notice, the instructor should re-schedule the meeting and contact the Smith Dean’s Office for support.
In most instances, the instructor will meet with the student to discuss the possible departure from academic integrity. At the meeting, the student will have the opportunity to respond to the investigation. If the student wishes, they may offer a written submission in addition to attending the meeting and may bring an advisor.
Procedures for dealing with academic integrity concerns in the Smith School of Business are governed by the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. After considering the available evidence, the instructor will determine if it is sufficient for a finding of departure from academic integrity. Also, to be considered are the student’s previous history, and mitigating circumstances. Mitigating circumstances do not exonerate or excuse from the finding of a departure from academic integrity, but these factors may be considered to ensure that the imposed sanction is fair, reasonable and proportionate to the gravity of the departure found. The decision must outline the evidence supporting reliance on the mitigating circumstances. The onus is on the student to adduce evidence of mitigating circumstances. Conflicts of evidence and issues of credibility on pivotal issues must be resolved, and a finding of fact made concerning the version of events before the finding of a departure from academic integrity can be made. The decision should be made within 14 days of meeting with the student (or receiving their written submission), or within a reasonable period as demanded by the complexity of the case.
In cases where there is no finding of departure from academic integrity: If, after a careful investigation of the evidence and consideration of the response by the student, the instructor determines that there are no grounds for a finding of departure from academic integrity, all documents related to the case are destroyed and the instructor informs the student that the investigation has been dropped using the Notice of File Closure form.
In cases where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity: If, after a careful investigation of the evidence and consideration of the response by the student, the instructor determines that there is sufficient and persuasive evidence to make a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor must complete a Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity form and determine an appropriate sanction or remedy. Up to this point, a record of previous departures from academic integrity is not relevant in making a finding of departure from academic integrity.
Where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor must first contact the Dean's Office to determine if there is a previous finding for the student. If a previous finding exists, the case will be referred to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel for the assignment of an appropriate sanction.
4.1.3 Assessment of Sanction
Where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor consults with the Dean’s Office. If the Dean’s Office reports a previous finding exists, the instructor refers the matter to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel for the assignment of an appropriate sanction. If there is no academic integrity record on file in the Smith Dean’s Office, the instructor may assign a remedy or sanction appropriate to the extent or severity of the offense. When considering the remedy or sanction, the instructor considers several factors in assessing the gravity of the remedial measure or sanction to be imposed. Additional information can be found on the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity website.
Following the investigation of the suspected departure from Academic Integrity, the professor will either: i) make a finding of a departure from academic integrity and impose a sanction (or consult with the Smith Academic Integrity Panel for sanction); or ii) determine there was no departure from Academic Integrity, notify the student the investigation has been dropped and destroy all documents related to the case.
After making the finding and setting a sanction within the scope of those available to the instructor, the instructor must inform the student in writing of the decision. If the finding appears to warrant a sanction more serious than the instructor may impose, or if there is a previous finding of a departure from academic integrity on file in the Smith Dean’s Office, the case shall be referred to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel.
Any student who is found to have committed a violation of academic integrity may face a range of sanctions, including but not limited to:
- An oral or written warning that such infractions constitute unacceptable behaviour (Note that an oral warning must still be documented on the Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity form)
- A learning experience involving a rewriting or revision of the original piece of work
- The submission of a new piece of work
- The completion of other work
- The deduction of partial or total marks for the assignment/exam
- A failing grade (down to a grade of zero) in the course.
If the penalty amounts to a failure in the course, the student may not drop the course, regardless of the drop deadlines.
In the case of a referral to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel, the Panel may impose sanctions ranging from those noted above to a recommendation to Senate that the student be required to withdraw from the University.
Records of findings of departures from Academic Integrity are kept in the Dean’s Office and in the Program Office.
4.2 Illness and Extenuating Circumstances Policies
4.2.1 Illness
A student who claims illness as a reason for missing academic obligations is responsible for informing the professor and the Program Director and may be required to provide evidence of illness.
Students who are too ill to attend class must notify the professor and the Program administration prior to the beginning of class. A student suffering from a short-term illness should submit a Self-Declaration of Illness form.
A notification of absence from an exam must be accompanied by documentation as follows:
- in cases of illness when a student is under the care of a physician, the student should provide a note from the physician. Retroactive doctors’ notes (i.e. notes obtained from physicians after the illness) are not acceptable.
- If a student is ill, but not under the care of a physician prior and during an exam, they can provide a Self-Declaration of Illness form.
As a matter of academic integrity, a student is responsible for making an honest declaration concerning the nature of their illness and its impact on their academic obligations. False declarations may be investigated under the Smith Academic Integrity Policy.
4.2.2 Extenuating Circumstances
The Program adheres to Queen’s policy on Academic Consideration for Students in Extenuating Circumstances Policy and the principle of a good faith response to requests for consideration. The policy enables students with extenuating circumstances to request academic consideration in a fair, reasonable and consistent manner.
Extenuating circumstances means a personal circumstance beyond the student’s control that has a direct and substantial impact on the student’s ability to meet essential academic requirements or standards. Extenuating circumstances include but are not limited to a sudden or acute physical or mental illness, serious injury to self or significant others, bereavement, a traumatic event, or other serious personal/family crisis. Extenuating circumstances may also include officially representing the university at a sanctioned event or through an invitation to participate in an event as a distinguished guest (e.g. national tournament, Olympics). Extenuating circumstances do not include personal or family events (e.g., holidays, weddings), academic or exam stress, or transportation or technological difficulties.
There are three extenuating circumstances levels, a student who is unable to satisfy the requirements of a course or the Program due to extenuating circumstances must notify the Program Director in writing as soon as possible.
Level 1: Brief Absence Students who require an unplanned brief absence from academic obligations for a period of up to 48 hours. Instructors and Faculty/School Offices have discretion to extend academic considerations for an unplanned Brief Absence beyond 48 hours if they deem it appropriate in situations where recovery requires additional days. In cases where a student who submitted a Self-Declaration of Brief Absence is not able to return to full academic functioning within a few days, the student should submit a Request for Academic Consideration for Extenuating Circumstances.
Level 2: Short Term Extenuating Circumstances Students who require academic consideration for a short-term period defined as more than 48 hours (with discretion for an additional one or two days) but less than 3 months. This applies to extenuating circumstances where the student anticipates a full recovery and return to previous levels of academic functioning within the next 3 months. This applies to extenuating circumstances that lead to a reduced ability to meet academic requirements due to physical or mental impairment. This includes an extended unanticipated illness (e.g., mononucleosis, pneumonia), a serious injury (e.g., concussion, broken bones), a required treatment (surgical procedure, significant side effects from new medication), serious injury or illness to a significant other, bereavement (e.g., loss of family member), traumatic event, or another significant personal crisis.
Students who are unable to meet academic obligations due to functional impairments and limitations related to a known underlying disability or diagnosed health condition should register with Queen’s Student Accessibility Services to receive ongoing academic accommodations tailored to their individual needs. Academic considerations should be individualized to the student’s circumstances and in proportion to the student’s ability to complete academic requirements. Depending on the ability of the student to engage in academic tasks and the nature of the program the student is in and related academic requirements, short term extenuating circumstances may require withdrawing from a course (or courses) or may require a medical leave of absence.
Level 3: Long-term Extenuating circumstances. Students who do not anticipate a full recovery or return to academic functioning within 3 months should speak with their Faculty / School Offices immediately to discuss academic implications and possible academic considerations (e.g., reduced course load, medical leave of absence). Students should take reasonable measures to promote academic success and their personal well-being by accessing available supports, including Queen’s Student Accessibility Services, Health and/or Counselling Services, and other campus supports or personal /professional supports as appropriate.
Students who anticipate a return to academic functioning but with ongoing need for academic accommodation should contact Queen’s Student Accessibility Services (QSAS) to register for ongoing academic accommodations. Students will need to provide documentation to QSAS related to their functional impairments.
Students seeking academic accommodations related to a chronic or ongoing physical or mental health condition or an existing disability should refer to the existing policy on Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Students with long term health conditions or disability should seek academic accommodation from Queen’s Student Accessibility Services in Student Wellness Services.
Privacy and confidentiality will be protected and maintained throughout this process to the extent possible. Information may be shared among university personal (e.g., faculty offices, instructors, exams office) on a need-to-know basis for the purpose of arranging academic considerations. Confidentiality cannot be maintained where there is reason to believe that an individual may be at risk of harming themselves or others.
In cases where a student is unable to act, a delegate may act on behalf of the student, with the student’s written consent.
Students are expected to request academic considerations as soon as extenuating circumstances are apparent. Requests for retroactive consideration should be directed to the Faculty/School Office and will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
For extenuating circumstances relating to sexual violence or harassment and discrimination, students can contact the Sexual Violence Prevention and Response Co-ordinator, the Human Rights Office, or Student Wellness Services, for support and for the facilitation of appropriate arrangements. The Policy on Sexual Violence Involving Queen’s University Students supersedes these procedures.
Students should submit the appropriate extenuating circumstances form(s).
If the student is requesting an alternate means of satisfying the Program requirements, a formal written request should be submitted to the Program Director. The request should include an explanation of the connection between the effects of the extenuating circumstances and the student’s academic performance, as well as the remedy being proposed.
The Program Director will respond to the student’s request for consideration promptly. The Program is committed to responding to students in a fair and consistent manner, considering the specific individual circumstances. The Program is also committed to upholding academic standards and ensuring that essential academic requirements are met.
If an instructor or supervisor does not assent to the request for academic consideration in extenuating circumstances made by a graduate student, academic consideration may nonetheless be granted, unless the instructor or supervisor provides justifiable reasons for withholding his or her assent. The decision to grant or deny the academic consideration shall be made by the Associate Dean of the School of Graduate Studies.
4.2.3 Official Documentation
Level 1 documentation: The university does not require verification documentation from a health care professional (on-campus or hospital or community-based) in these circumstances.
Level 2 documentation: Students may be required to provide verification documentation. This may include the Verification of Personal Health Condition form, a Verification of Confidential Extenuating Circumstances form, or other documentation (e.g., death certification, police report of an accident). Students are not required to disclose specific details of their personal circumstances to their instructors or supervisors, but the Faculty/School Office may require documentation that verifies the extenuating circumstance and the inability or reduced capacity to complete academic work. In cases where a Verification of Confidential Extenuating Circumstances form has been submitted, additional documentation or detail is not required. Official documentation, including notes from health care professionals, need not outline the specific details of the student’s condition, but must clearly indicate ways in which the circumstances directly affect the student’s performance, and verify that these effects were substantial enough to cause the academic disruption. Information about the start, duration and present state of the condition or circumstances, as well as 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, are essential.
Level 3 documentation: Documentation may include Self-declaration forms, requests for academic consideration forms, verification of Confidential Extenuating Circumstances form or other documentation (determined on a case-by-case basis).
A student’s privacy and confidentiality are maintained throughout this process to the extent possible. Information may be shared among university personal (e.g., instructors or supervisors, exams office) on a need-to-know basis for the purpose of arranging academic considerations. Documentation collected as part of this policy will not be part of a student’s permanent academic record.
Documents submitted may be verified by the Program administration. False statements or documents may be investigated in accordance with the Smith Policy on Academic Integrity.
4.2.4 Unresolved Circumstances
The appeals and consideration process does not compensate for circumstances that the student is unable to resolve, or for which the student is unwilling to actively seek accommodation. In addition, the appeals process does not compensate for circumstances that are actively being accommodated, for example where a student’s permanent disabilities are being accommodated through Queen’s Student Accessibility Services Office.
Multiple appeals citing the same 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. In order for such an appeal to succeed, there must be convincing evidence that the circumstances that affected the student’s academic performance will be resolved within a reasonable timeline, or will be appropriately managed on an ongoing basis.
4.3 Language
In accordance with Queen’s University Language Policy, examinations and assignments are to be submitted in English, except where a Faculty Board has approved an alternative practice or where a special agreement has been entered into between the Program and a student.
4.4 Acceptable Use of Information Technology Resources Policy
All members of the Queen’s community are bound by the Queen’s policy on the Acceptable Use of Information Technology (IT) Resources. The policy states:
The use of Queen's University information technology (IT) resources must be consistent with the academic mission of the University. These IT resources are provided to support the teaching, learning, research and administrative activities of the Queen's community. As a member or guest of the Queen's community, you may have access to valuable internal and external networks and resources, and Sensitive Information, and you are expected to use these resources in a responsible, ethical, and legal manner. Your actions should not adversely affect the ability of others to use these resources or compromise the security and privacy of sensitive information.
4.4.1 Submission of Electronic Assignments
Students are required to submit all assignments electronically. It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that all electronic submissions have been submitted properly and are corruption-free.
Any assignment that is detected to be carrying a corrupt file will be immediately destroyed, and the student must re-submit the assignment corruption-free. If the assignment is not re-submitted before the assignment deadline it will be marked “late.”
4.5 Examinations
4.5.1 Access to Examinations
The term final examination paper refers to the final examination question paper in a course together with the graded answer paper written by the student. These documents, in accordance with the Senate Policy on Student Access to Final Examination Papers, must be retained by the professor or the School for a period of 12 months.
4.5.1.1 Informal Access
Professors may informally review the final examination paper with a student who requests it and are encouraged to do so. However, access may not be granted before the final marks are released.
4.5.1.2 Formal Access
A student may obtain access to their final exam as part of an appeal process. This may be supervised access to, or a copy of, the final examination paper. The student should contact the Program administration to arrange for formal access to their final exam.
4.5.2 Changes to Examination Times
Requests for changes to an individual examination time must be made to the Program Director as soon as the student is aware of a conflict. Normally, such requests will only be granted if extenuating circumstances (beyond the student’s control) will prevent the student from writing the exam at the scheduled time.
The exam dates for the courses with exams will be posted well in advance of the date of the exam. The policies regarding exam locations and change of dates are set out below.
- Changes to the preferred exam location can be made up to two weeks prior to any subsequent exam by sending a request in writing to both the Program Manager and the Administrative Coordinator, Assignments and Exams at Queen’s. Students should understand that changes requested within two weeks of the exam may not be permitted.
- All requests for changes to exam dates must meet the following criteria.
- A written request for the change of date must be received by the Program Manager at Queen’s at least two weeks in advance of the exam; the request must clearly state the reason for the change.
- All requests must be approved by the Program administration in consultation with the course professor; this process may require supporting documentation.
- The student requesting the change of exam date must secure their own proctor and secure their own exam location and pay all associated costs. The student will be provided with a list of persons who qualify to be proctors for exams conducted by Queen’s.
- In extenuating circumstances, changes to exam dates may be considered if the criteria set out in 1 and 2 above are not met.
4.6 Queen's University Student Code of Conduct
Queen’s University is dedicated to learning, intellectual inquiry, the dissemination and advancement of knowledge, personal and professional development, and good citizenship. All students are required to read and adhere to Queen’s University Student Code of Conduct and Procedures Under the Queen's University Student Code of Conduct (PDF 250 KB) (2021) Students should refer to the Student Policy Index for more information on all student policies.
Students are expected to adhere to and promote the University’s core values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and personal responsibility in all aspects of University life, academic and non-academic. These core values are intended to inform and guide student conduct as they foster mutual respect for the dignity, property, rights and well-being of others.
As a member of the Queen’s community, every student accepts the University’s policies, rules and procedures and acknowledges the right of the University to set standards of conduct, as well as the right of the University and/or its Authorized Agent(s) to impose sanctions for conduct found to have violated those standards.
4.6.1 Professionalism and Facilities Etiquette
All study and workspaces provided by Smith School of Business should be treated with respect and care. All students are expected to properly reserve space, use the facilities for the purposes for which they are intended, and to leave spaces clean, tidy, in the proper furniture configuration and with the room supplies.
5: ACADEMIC DECISIONS AND APPEALS
Academic Regulations at Queen’s University were designed to ensure that students are being treated fairly and equitably while upholding the academic standards of the institution. On occasion, there are extenuating circumstances that are usually beyond a student’s control that may have impacted their performance at Queen’s. Appeal processes were developed to reconsider the appropriateness of any sanctions or penalties that may have been imposed upon a student who may have extenuating circumstances. Various types of academic decisions may be made by a course professor, Program Director, Academic Progress Committee, Academic Integrity Panel, Academic Appeals Committee and/or the University Student Appeal Board. Admissions decisions are not subject to appeal.
The appeals process at Queen’s University is comprised of several levels of appeal by different appeal bodies. In accordance with the Student Academic Appeals Policy, the decision system is based on the principle that "decisions should generally be made by those who are most familiar with the context”[1] . The Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy reflects the intent of the Senate regarding Student Academic Appeals, which is twofold: To ensure that students receive fair treatment and are aware of their rights and responsibilities and to establish a fair, efficient process for addressing student appeals from academic decisions.
Appeals of academic decisions fall into four possible categories: appeals of grades (Section 5.1), appeals of other academic decisions (Section 5.2), appeals of academic standing and progression decisions (Section 5.3), and appeals of academic integrity decisions (Section 5.4).
Note that it is the student’s responsibility to clearly establish that grounds for an appeal exist as the basis for an appeal. Below the various decision-making bodies and their mandates are explained.
[1] Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy, Introduction (p. 4).
5.1 Appeals of Grades
Grades are determined by course professors. Appeals of grades in courses (including assignments, examination papers, and final grades) are first handled at the course professor level.
Examination papers and course marks of students whose final grade in a course is marginally below a letter grade, and especially below a failing grade, are reviewed with special care by faculty members before such grades are assigned. Therefore, it is unlikely that such a grade is incorrect or unfair to the student. However, if a student feels that a course grade or a portion of it has been unfairly assessed, they should first make an attempt to resolve the issue informally with the professor.
If the student feels that the issue remains unresolved, they should contact the Program Director who will initiate a formal grade review. A review of the assignment or examination shall be conducted by two examiners appointed by the Program Director or designate; one examiner shall be the original professor or grader, if available. The review shall involve a re‐reading of the final examination or deliverable(s) in the course and a review of the student’s course record.
Students are not charged a fee for filing an appeal.
Note that it is the responsibility of the student to preserve all exercises, papers, reports, and other graded material for the course and to submit a copy of these documents with the request for review. The scanned copy of any graded assignment or material returned to a student shall be deemed to be the original document for the purposes of this section.
Note that an appeal may result in no change to the grade, an increase in the grade, or a decrease in the grade. The decision of the examiner(s) is final, and there is no further appeal available.
5.2 Appeals of Other Academic Decisions
The Program Director makes some decisions for students facing special circumstances in the Program. The student should request consideration as appropriate to the Program Director as soon as they are aware of a situation requiring such consideration. Examples of such decisions could include: changing a course registration from one elective to another, or deferring an exam.
Appeals of decisions by the Program Director are made to the Academic Progress Committee.
5.3 Appeals of Academic Standing and Progression Decisions
Students are considered to be in Good Academic Standing unless they have violated one or more of the Academic Regulations of the Program. As noted, students who violate one or more of the Academic Regulations of the Program are normally required to withdraw from the Program. In such a case, the Program Director will normally inform the student in writing that, because of their violation of one or more of the Regulations, they are required to withdraw from the Program.
Appeals of these decisions are made to the Academic Progress Committee.
See below for the Academic Progress Committee’s Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure.
5.3.1 The Academic Progress Committee
Smith School of Business
Master of Business Administration, Master of Management, and Graduate Diploma Programs Academic Progress Committee
Terms of Reference
Adopted by Faculty Board September 12, 2017
1 - Terms of Reference
The Master of Business Administration (“MBA”), Master of Management (“MOM”), and Graduate Diploma (“GD”) Academic Progress Committee is responsible for making decisions about academic progression and other academic matters relating to MBA, MOM and GD students at Smith School of Business. The committee will hereafter be referred to as the “MBA/MOM APC”.
Academic Progress Committee members are knowledgeable about Smith School of Business Master of Business Administration, Master of Management and Graduate Diploma programs, and Queen’s University policies and procedures. The MBA/MOM APC provides a uniform approach in the handling of academic matters across the Smith School of Business professional Masters programs.
2 - Jurisdiction
The Academic Progress Committee (APC) is established by the Smith School of Business Faculty Board to monitor and make decisions about academic matters and the academic progress of Master of Business Administration students in: the Full-Time, Executive, and Accelerated MBA Programs; all Master of Management Programs; and all Graduate Diploma Programs.
The APC considers the cases and special circumstances, if any, of students who appeal a decision regarding the application of the academic regulations, or another academic matter, that has been made at the Program level.
2.1 - No Jurisdiction
The APC does not have jurisdiction to hear appeals of:
- matters related to individual or team assignments and/or exam grades (such appeals are made to the Program Director);
- findings or sanctions related to departures from Academic Integrity (such appeals are heard by the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Panel);
3 - Membership
The MBA/MOM Academic Progress Committee is comprised of a total of seven voting members, all of whom are knowledgeable about the MBA, MOM and GD programs. APC members are faculty members of Smith School of Business and are appointed by the Associate Dean, Faculty. Two faculty members are appointed Co-Chairs.
Members normally hold a term of three years (preferably in staggered terms). New members assume their duties on July 1 of each year.
Hearing Panels of the MBA/MOM APC shall be appointed by the Co-Chair to hear individual student appeals. Hearing Panels shall normally consist of a minimum of three APC members, including one Co-Chair, and a maximum of six APC members, based on availability and any conflict of interest issues.
3.1 - Role of the Co-Chair
The Co-Chairs of the APC will be faculty members. Another member of the APC may be delegated the role of Co-Chair if the appointed Co-Chairs are unable to participate in a particular case.
Normally, one Co-Chair will act as Chair of a Hearing Panel. The Co-Chair will:
- appoint a Hearing Panel;
- serve as the Chair of a Hearing Panel, unless that role is delegated as above;
- convene hearings;
- preside over hearings of the MBA/MOM APC Panel according to the Rules of Procedure[1] and give procedural direction for the conduct of individual cases to the extent that a procedural issue is not dealt with in the Rules of Procedure;
- participate in the Hearing Panel deliberations and decision-making;
- guide the APC in the uniform and consistent application of the regulations and relevant policies within and across the MBA/MOM/GD programs;
- ensure hearings are conducted fairly and with due process; and
- draft and finalize the decision of the Hearing Panel consistent with the findings and reasons of the APC members and communicate the Panel’s Decision to the parties involved.
[1] See the MBA/MOM APC Rules of Procedure for the rules regarding pre-hearing, hearing, and post-hearing matters.
5.3.2 The Academic Progress Committee Rules of Procedure
Smith School of Business
Master of Business Administration, Master of Management, and Graduate Diploma Programs Academic Progress Committee
Adopted by Faculty Board September 12, 2017
Rules of Procedure
The following Rules of Procedure apply to the General Proceedings, Appeal Hearings (“Hearings”), Decisions, Post-Hearing and Record-Keeping matters of the Master of Business Administration, Master of Management and Graduate Diploma Academic Progress Committee (“MBA/MOM APC”).
These Rules of Procedure shall be interpreted liberally to facilitate the just, expeditious and cost-effective determination of every proceeding on its merits.
The Terms of Reference for the MBA/MOM Academic Program Committee are available in a separate document.
1 - General Rules
The following rules of apply to proceedings before an APC Hearing Panel (“Panel”):
1.1 - Panel Decisions Will Be Made In Accordance With Relevant School Regulations And Procedures
The Panel will adhere to the relevant program Academic Regulations as well as policies and procedures of the School and Queen’s University.
1.2 - All appeals are to be heard by the Panel in camera
To protect the privacy and confidentiality of students, Panel meetings and Hearings are closed to the public.
Hearings are not normally recorded, unless a special request is made by the appellant in advance of the Hearing. In such a case, the Chair of the Panel (“Chair”) will decide whether to record the Hearing. The Chair may also wish to record a Hearing, and will inform the parties of the intention to do so in advance of the Hearing. Any transcripts of a Hearing will be provided to either party upon request, in which case a copy will also be provided to the other party. Transcripts must be treated as confidential. There will be no recording of the Panel’s deliberations. Participants may take their own notes during the Hearing. All such notes are transitory1 and are not considered to be University Records.
In cases where an APC member has, or may be reasonably perceived to have, a conflict of interest with respect to a specific case, that individual may not serve on the APC Panel in connection with that case2.
No member will participate in the deliberations or final Decision of the Panel unless present for the entire Appeal Hearing.
1.5 - Supplementary Rules Of Procedure
As needed, the Chair has the power to issue such supplementary rules of procedure as may be necessary to govern the conduct of an Appeal.
1.6 - The Panel Has No Power To Compel Any Person To Attend A Hearing
The Chair may request the participation of parties and witnesses, but it has no power to compel participation.
2 - Appeal Hearing
A student wishing to appeal an academic decision made at the Program level has a right to a Hearing before an APC Hearing Panel. In such a case, the student has seven (7) days following the date of the Program’s decision to provide the APC Co-Chair with written confirmation that they wish to appeal the Program’s decision (“Notice of Appeal”).
2.1 - Written Submissions
After indicating their intention to appeal, the student will have a further 14 days following the date on their Notice of Appeal to provide the APC Co-Chair with a full written Submission.
i. The Student’s Submission: The student’s Submission should outline their situation, include any and all pertinent evidence, a list of any witnesses the student intends to bring to the Appeal Hearing, and the student’s desired remedy for the situation.
ii. The Director’s Submission: The Co-Chair of the APC will share the Student’s Submission with the Program Director, who will have seven (7) days following receipt of the Student’s Submission to respond with their own written Submission if they wish. The Program Director’s Submission should include the reasons for their decision, any pertinent evidence, and a list of any witnesses they intend to bring to the Appeal Hearing.
iii. The Student’s Response: The Program Director’s Submission will be shared with the student who will have seven (7) days following receipt of the Director’s Submission to submit a final written Statement to the APC Co-Chair if they wish.
2.2 - The Proceeding
Following the receipt of all written Submissions, the Co-Chair shall appoint the members of the Hearing Panel[1] and schedule the Appeal Hearing. The student shall be given sufficient notice of the date, time and location of the Hearing, as well as the names of all participants, and their role, in at the Hearing. The Hearing will be conducted in an appropriate space.
- The student has the right to appear in-person, electronically, or to opt not to appear at the Hearing.
- A Hearing may proceed and a decision made without additional input from the student in cases where the student opts not to appear at their Hearing.
- The student has the right to representation, including an Ombuds Academic Appeal Advisor University from the Office of the University Ombudsperson and/or legal counsel and/or other agent (all at the student’s own expense) at the Appeal Hearing. The student may make oral submissions, or their representative may make submissions on their behalf. The student must inform the Chair of the name and role of any representatives in advance of the Hearing.
- Normally the Program Director or their delegate will attend the Hearing and make oral submissions. The Program Director may also bring representation who may make submissions on their behalf.
- Other witnesses will be asked to participate in the Hearing as deemed necessary by the Chair. Witnesses are individuals who have first-hand knowledge of the matters at issue in the Appeal Hearing; the evidence of ‘character’ witnesses will not normally be received by the Panel. Each party shall have an opportunity to question witnesses. The Chair can limit questioning of a witness if the Chair believes the questioning is irrelevant, abusive or otherwise inappropriate.
- The Chair shall determine what evidence is admitted as part of the Hearing. The Chair shall normally apply a relevance approach[2] to such determinations. The Chair has the right to exclude evidence that is deemed irrelevant, repetitive or otherwise inappropriate.
- If, during the course of the Hearing, the Chair decides that more information is required in order to clarify a matter, the Chair may adjourn the Hearing to permit the relevant parties to bring forward such information or facts or to permit the Panel to obtain such information.
- The Chair may decide to adjourn the Hearing at the request of a party if the Chair believes that a party may be unfairly prejudiced should the Hearing proceed.
- The Panel has the right to seek confirmation and/or verification of any evidence, claims, or submissions made by any participants in the Hearing; should it be determined that false information was provided to the Panel, the matter may be investigated under the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy.
3 - The Decision
After hearing all the evidence, the Panel shall deliberate in camera. The deliberations of the Panel are confidential.
Following deliberations, the Panel may:
- Dismiss the Appeal and uphold the original decision of the Program. In the case that the student be required to withdraw, a formal letter advising the student of the requirement to withdraw will be issued; or,
- Allow the Appeal and grant the remedy requested by the Student; or,
- Allow the Appeal in part and modify the Program’s original decision, and impose an appropriate sanction. This may include:
- Imposing specific conditions under which the student will be permitted to continue in the Program and/or any requirements the student must meet, including the timelines within which such conditions and/or requirements must be met;
- Requiring the student to:
- complete additional work;
- repeat an exam, paper, or course;
- achieve a minimum grade(s);
- provide evidence of fitness to continue in the Program;
- Placing the student on Academic Probation until the student satisfies all conditions and/or requirements within the timeline(s) set by the Panel.
- Impose other terms and/or conditions as may appropriate for the specific situation.
The Panel may not award financial compensation to a student.
The Panel’s Decision shall be communicated to the student within seven (7) days, or within a reasonable time as demanded by the complexity of the case, via a Decision Letter from the Panel Chair. The Decision Letter will include the reasons for the Decision, information about the next level of appeal, to whom to address an appeal, and information about the availability of the support of the Office of the University Ombudsperson.
The Panel’s Decision Letter shall be the official record of the Appeal. The Decision Letter will include the effective date of any actions to be taken by the Program (see Section 4).
4 - Post-Proceeding Matters
In accordance with the Senate Student Academic Appeal Policy, Section 34, the student is normally entitled to exhaust all levels of appeal before sanctions are applied, except in the rare case where an academic unit determines that the interests of third parties may be prejudiced by the continued enrolment of a student in a course or program. In such a case, the Panel will determine if the student may continue in their Program until appeal processes are exhausted, and under what conditions the student may do so, having regard for the need to protect the interests of the third party/parties. The Panel shall address the effective date of any actions and/or sanctions in the Decision Letter.
5 - Records Management And Privacy
Queen’s University is subject to provincial access and privacy legislation with regard to the information it holds about the University and the individuals who participate in the Queen’s community. Specifically, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) and the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA) apply to various aspects of the University’s operations. To the extent that the University has operations in the European Union, it is subject to the EU General Data Protection Regulation.
Appeal Records consist of all documents filed by the parties, the recording, if any, of the Appeal Hearing(s), the transcript, if any, of the recording, and the Decision Letter issued by the Panel.
5.1 - Responsibilities of the Co-Chair
The APC Co-Chair or delegate is responsible for collecting and distributing Appeal Records. The Co-Chair shall handle such records in a secure manner which protects the confidentiality of the documents.
Following an Appeal Hearing and issuance of the Decision Letter, the Panel Chair shall collect the files and any notes made during the Hearing by Panel members. All such notes are transitory and are not considered to be University Records. They form no part of the Appeal Record and shall be destroyed immediately following the issuance of the Panel’s Decision.
5.2 - Records Retention Schedule
Once the Panel renders its decision:
- The Decision Letter is the official record of the Decision, a copy of which shall be kept by the APC Co-Chair, the Program Director and in the Dean’s Office.
- Original Appeal Records are to be kept by the APC Co-Chair for one (1) year following the date on which the student has exhausted all levels of appeal at the University, or, for one (1) year following the expiry of the deadline for the student to pursue an appeal, whichever occurs first.
- Transitory records may be destroyed
- Duplicated records will be destroyed
Appeals of these decisions are made to the Academic Appeals Committee.
5.3 - Appeals of Academic Integrity Decisions
Course professors will normally investigate and make decisions regarding possible violations of academic integrity in their courses in accordance with the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy and as set out in Section 5.1.
Appeals of professors’ decisions regarding academic integrity are made to the Academic Integrity Panel.
In cases where the Academic Integrity Panel is the initial decision maker, appeals are made to the Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee.
5.4 - The Smith School Of Business Academic Appeals Committee
The Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) has jurisdiction over all matters related to academic appeals involving students registered in the School of Business (with the exception of the PhD and Master of Science programs). The AAC hears appeals of decisions made by Academic Progress Committee and the Academic Integrity Panel.
Normally, the AAC serves as a true appeal board, which is not empowered to substitute its own decision for that of the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel, but rather reviews the decision of the previous decision-making body based on the same information[1] available to the previous body at the time the decision was made.[2]
The AAC reviews the circumstances of the decision of the previous decision-maker to: ensure that the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel did not exceed its jurisdiction; ensure that there was procedural fairness; ensure that there was appropriate consideration of extenuating circumstances; uphold the academic policies and principles reflected in the School’s and University’s regulations; and determine if the decision was reasonable.
In rendering a decision, the AAC may uphold the decision of the previous body, grant the student's appeal, or modify the original decision/sanction. Any decision made by the AAC must be within the scope of the School’s regulations.
Appeals of decisions made by the AAC are made to the University Student Appeal Board.
5.5 - The University Student Appeal Board
Where an appeal to the University Student Appeal Board (“USAB”) is permitted, after exhausting all internal appeals within their faculty or School, a student may appeal to USAB within two weeks after the date of the Faculty’s or School’s last decision. See the Student Academic Appeals Policy (“SAAP”) for the full mandate and processes of USAB. Faculties and Schools are bound by and must implement all decisions of USAB. The University Student Appeal Board is the final internal appeal body at Queen’s University.
The University Student Appeal Board (USAB) has jurisdiction to hear the following types of appeals by students from the final academic decision-making body within their Faculty or School:
USAB has the jurisdiction to review a decision if it results in the application of an academic regulation that impedes a student’s academic standing in a program, but USAB does not have the jurisdiction to review the academic regulation itself; a decision concerning a departure from academic integrity and
step-two decisions made by a Unit Head concerning an employment-related issue between an undergraduate teaching assistant and their course supervisor.
The Provost and Vice-Principal (Academic) (“Provost”) or their designate may, refer any decision involving a departure from academic integrity directly to a proceeding before USAB if they are satisfied that an internal appeal of the decision cannot be made in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness; and the matter has not been appealed to another body.
USAB will have full jurisdiction to impose any sanction that could have been made by a body with original jurisdiction over the matter, including requiring the student to withdraw. The provost (or their designate) will be present at the USAB proceeding and will determine what sanction to seek from USAB. USAB have no jurisdiction to consider the academic substance of decisions and assessments.
The grounds for an appeal to USAB are limited to cases in which a student can establish that:
- The decision-making body whose decision is being appealed failed to act in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as 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 affected 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 be upheld if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes, in which case USAB is not permitted to substitute its opinion for that of the decision-maker whose decision is under appeal.
- The decision-maker whose decision is being appealed to USAB acted without, or exceeded its, jurisdiction.
No Costs Reimbursement
Neither USAB nor any other decision-maker in the University has the power to direct that a student receive compensation for any costs or expenses incurred during any University-based proceeding. Notwithstanding this, USAB may order that a student receive reimbursement for loss of a Queen’s University bursary, scholarship, or similar funds because of a decision that was reversed on appeal. This remedy is available only if the student remains a student following the issuance of USAB’s decision, or, if the student graduated while their appeal was pending.
Decisions of USAB
In deciding an appeal, USAB may do one of the following:
i. Remit a matter for reconsideration by the decision-maker whose decision has been appealed to USAB, with directions or recommendations; a reconsideration decision may be appealed to USAB based on one of the Grounds for Appeal stated above.
ii. Modify the original decision, including making any decision that the original decision-maker could have made, but only where:
a. Proceeding in accordance with Section 48(i) of the Rules of Procedures for USAB would cause delay that prejudices the student’s rights; or,
b. USAB has made a finding of bias in the decision-making process below.
The decision of the USAB is final, and there is no further level of appeal.
5.6 - Appeals At Partner Institutions
Appeals of academic decisions at partner, exchange and double degree institutions are subject to the policies and procedures at those universities. Students should note that Queen’s has no jurisdiction, or ability to influence, partner exchange or double degree universities in these matters.
1 See the Queen’s University Policy on Transitory Records: Transitory Records are created or received by the University in the course of conducting its activities, but have no ongoing operational, informational, evidential or historical value. Usually transitory records have an immediate or short-term value, pertaining to an immediate task or minor transaction. They can exist in any format or medium. An example is an e-mail confirming attendance at a meeting.
2 Normally, having taught the appellant in a class that is neither directly the subject of the appeal nor indirectly the subject of the appeal is not considered a conflict of interest and does not require that the APC member recuse themselves. A conflict of interest may be present if: there is a relationship between the APC member and the student (such as a consulting or family relationship); the APC member has an interest in the outcome of the decision; the APC member has pre-judged the case; the APC member was involved in an earlier stage of decision-making.
In cases where a conflict is unclear, the remaining members of the APC will determine if the member should be recused.
Note that in complex cases, additional time may be required. The Co-Chair has the power to make exceptions to the stated timeframes as appropriate based on the complexity of the case. Parties must make requests for additional time to the Co-Chair as soon as they determine the need for additional time.
[1] Hearing Panels shall normally consist of a minimum of three APC members and a maximum of all APC members based on availability and any conflict of interest issues.
[2] A relevance approach provides that evidence should be accepted if it is deemed to be relevant to the matter before the Panel.
[1] In situations where new evidence becomes available which may have, or is likely to have, affected the original decision of the previous decision-maker (i.e. the APC or the AIP), the AAC will refer those cases back to the previous decision-maker.
[2] Where the Academic Integrity Panel (AIP) was the initial decision-maker, the AAC will investigate an Academic Integrity case de novo.
5.4 Appeals of Academic Integrity Decisions
Course professors will normally investigate and make decisions regarding possible violations of academic integrity in their courses in accordance with the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy and as set out in Section 4.1.
Appeals of professors’ decisions regarding academic integrity are made to the Academic Integrity Panel.
In cases where the Academic Integrity Panel is the initial decision maker, appeals are made to the Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee.
5.5 The Academic Progress Committee
The Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) has jurisdiction over all matters related to academic appeals involving students registered in the School of Business (with the exception of the PhD and Master of Science programs). The AAC hears appeals of decisions made by Academic Progress Committee and the Academic Integrity Panel.
Normally, the AAC serves as a true appeal board, which is not empowered to substitute its own decision for that of the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel, but rather reviews the decision of the previous decision-making body based on the same information[1] available to the previous body at the time the decision was made.[2]
The AAC reviews the circumstances of the decision of the previous decision-maker to: ensure that the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel did not exceed its jurisdiction; ensure that there was procedural fairness; ensure that there was appropriate consideration of extenuating circumstances; uphold the academic policies and principles reflected in the School’s and University’s regulations; and determine if the decision was reasonable.
In rendering a decision, the AAC may uphold the decision of the previous body, grant the student's appeal, or modify the original decision/sanction. Any decision made by the AAC must be within the scope of the School’s regulations.
Appeals of decisions made by the AAC are made to the University Student Appeal Board.
[1] In situations where new evidence becomes available which may have, or is likely to have, affected the original decision of the previous decision-maker (i.e. the APC or the AIP), the AAC will refer those cases back to the previous decision-maker.
[2] Where the Academic Integrity Panel (AIP) was the initial decision-maker, the AAC will investigate an Academic Integrity case de novo.
For the APC Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure, please see Appendices A&B.
5.6 The University Student Appeal Board
Where an appeal to the University Student Appeal Board (“USAB”) is permitted, after exhausting all internal appeals within their faculty or School, a student may appeal to USAB within two weeks after the date of the Faculty’s or School’s last decision. See the Student Academic Appeals Policy (“SAAP”) for the full mandate and processes of USAB. Faculties and Schools are bound by and must implement all decisions of USAB. The University Student Appeal Board is the final internal appeal body at Queen’s University. The decision of the USAB is final, and there is no further level of appeal.
The University Student Appeal Board (USAB) has jurisdiction to hear the following types of appeals by students from the final academic decision-making body within their Faculty or School:
USAB has the jurisdiction to review a decision if it results in the application of an academic regulation that impedes a student’s academic standing in a program, but USAB does not have the jurisdiction to review the academic regulation itself; a decision concerning a departure from academic integrity and step-two decisions made by a Unit Head concerning an employment-related issue between an undergraduate teaching assistant and their course supervisor.
The Provost and Vice-Principal (Academic) (“Provost”) or their designate may, refer any decision involving a departure from academic integrity directly to a proceeding before USAB if they are satisfied that an internal appeal of the decision cannot be made in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness; and the matter has not been appealed to another body.
USAB will have full jurisdiction to impose any sanction that could have been made by a body with original jurisdiction over the matter, including requiring the student to withdraw. The Provost (or their designate) will be present at the USAB proceeding and will determine what sanction to seek from USAB. USAB have no jurisdiction to consider the academic substance of decisions and assessments.
The grounds for an appeal to USAB are limited to cases in which a student is able to establish that:
- The decision-making body whose decision is being appealed failed to act in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as 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 affected 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 be upheld if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes, in which case USAB is not permitted to substitute its opinion for that of the decision-maker whose decision is under appeal.
2. The decision-maker whose decision is being appealed to USAB acted without, or exceeded its, jurisdiction.
5.7 Appeals at Partner Institutions
Appeals of academic decisions at partner, exchange and double degree institutions are subject to the policies and procedures at those universities. Students should note that Queen’s has no jurisdiction, or ability to influence, partner exchange or double degree universities in these matters.
6: STUDENT SERVICES
6.1 Educational Equity
Through the Educational Equity Policy, Queen's University recognizes that the values of equity and diversity are vital to and in harmony with its educational mission and standards of excellence. It acknowledges that direct, indirect and systemic discrimination exist within our institutional structures, policies and practices and in our community. These take many forms and work to differentially advantage and disadvantage persons across social identities such as race, ethnicity, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith and socioeconomic status, among other examples.
Queen's is committed to counteracting discrimination in this institution and developing a climate of educational equity that recognizes and respects the equal dignity and worth of all who seek to participate in the life, work and mission of the University. Such a climate is created and maintained by developing a university-wide commitment to and understanding of educational equity, supported by policies, programs, curricula, practices and traditions that facilitate individuals - and equity-seeking groups- free, safe, and full participation.
Any student who has concerns related to educational equity may contact the Program Director, the Office of the University Ombudsperson, and/or the Human Rights and Equity Services.
6.2 Accommodation for Special Needs/Disabilities
Queen’s Policy Concerning Students with Disabilities states:
Queen's University is committed to facilitating the integration of students with disabilities into the University community. While all students must satisfy the essential requirements for courses and programs, the administration, faculty, staff, and students at Queen's are expected to provide reasonable accommodation to students with disabilities. Reasonable accommodation may require members of the University community to exercise creativity and flexibility in responding to the needs of students with disabilities while maintaining academic standards.
This policy acknowledges that fundamental to the academic and personal success of students is their responsibility both to demonstrate self-reliance and to identify needs requiring accommodation.
It is the responsibility of students in need of accommodation for a disability or other special need to contact Queen’s Student Accessibility Services to register for formal accommodations. In partnership with Student Accessibility Services, the Program will work to ensure that appropriate modifications or accommodations are made in accordance with Queen’s Policy on Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities and Queen’s Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Procedure.
6.3 Academic Advising
Students should contact the Program administration with questions about degree requirements, electives or other academic matters as appropriate.
6.4 Personal Counselling
Queen’s University provides personal counselling services through Student Wellness Services. Student Wellness Services supports the personal, academic, and social development of students at Queen's University by providing a range of programs and services.
Students may also contact the Program Director to discuss supports available through Smith School of Business.
6.5 The University Ombudsperson
Queen’s University is committed to the just, fair and equitable treatment of each and every member of the University community. In keeping with this commitment, the Office of the University Ombudsperson provides an independent, impartial and confidential office through which members of the University community may pursue the just, fair and equitable resolution of university-related concerns within its jurisdiction.
Among other duties, the Office of the University Ombudsperson: receives, assesses, and facilitates the informal resolution of concerns and complaints; provides confidential and independent advice and support to members of the University community; acts as a liaison between individuals and/or groups at all levels serving as a communicator or informal conciliator; and mediates the resolution of complaints.
Any student who finds themselves in an appeal situation is strongly advised to contact the Office of the University Ombudsperson for advice, assistance and support. In appropriate circumstances and subject to availability, the Office of the University Ombudsperson can assign an Ombuds Academic Appeal Advisor to assist a student who is facing serious adverse academic consequences. The role of an Ombuds Academic Appeal Advisor is to ensure that students are aware of their rights and responsibilities and to counsel students about opportunities to resolve their matter.
7: ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES
7.1 The Faculty Board of Smith School of Business
In May 1963, the Faculty Board of Smith School of Business was established by the Board of Trustees of the University on the Senate's recommendation, to provide an appropriate body for the regulation of the conduct of the School's academic programs.
The Faculty Board of Smith School of Business (SSB) is constituted as follows: the Principal (ex officio), the Dean and Associate Dean(s) of Smith School of Business, all regular faculty of SSB, all adjunct academic staff of SSB, all other persons, who are currently teaching or whose appointment is in force at the date of the meeting or those in other faculties giving required courses for any of the degree programs in SSB; one senior administrative officer from each of the major teaching programs (eg., BCom, Queen's MBA, Exec MBA, AMBA, Exec MBA Americas, Master of Management, MSc/PhD); a representative of all non-academic, non-teaching staff of Smith School of Business (to be elected by this group); President of the Commerce Society, two BCom student Senators, two other representatives from the Commerce Society, one student representative from the Queen's MBA program, one student representative from the Executive MBA Programs, one representative from the AMBA Program, one representative from the Exec MBA Americas Program, one student representative from the Master of Management Programs, one representative from the MSc Program, one from the PhD Program.
7.2 Review of Record by Faculty Board
The Faculty Board of the School of Business reserves the right to review the record of any student. The Faculty Board will recommend to the Senate the granting of the Degree, after all courses have been completed in accordance with the provisions specified in this Calendar.
7.3 Student Names
As the University is committed to the integrity of its student records, each student is required to provide either on application for admission or on personal data forms required for registration, their complete, legal name. Any requests to change a name, by means of alteration, deletion, substitution or addition must be accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation in accordance with the University Policy on Student Names.
7.4 Confidentiality
The Program acknowledges that confidentiality is a serious and important issue for students. Students may be submitting and developing confidential business plans and strategies, and these submissions are carefully protected. All staff sign confidentiality agreements. These confidentiality agreements are kept on file in the Program office, and students may request a copy at any time.
Class discussions will frequently include company-specific examples. In order to encourage open class discussions, all in-class discussions should be held in the strictest confidence by students and professors, and must not be discussed outside of class. Recorded classes are for the purpose of helping students in their studies and must not be copied, shared or distributed in any way.
7.5 Conflict of Interest
Fairness or objectivity may be compromised if academic evaluation is conducted, even in part, by someone to whom there is a close personal or professional tie (for example, a family member or consulting relationship). Where such a tie does exist between student and instructor, the parties involved have the responsibility to declare a potential conflict of interest, normally to the Program Director who will assist, without prejudice, in arranging evaluation by alternative means.
Conflicts of interest may also arise with the sharing of confidential company information on projects, as well as within teams. When this occurs, the parties involved must declare the potential conflict to the Program Director who will make, without prejudice, alternative arrangements.
7.6 Withdrawal and Re-Admission
A student who withdraws from the Program, whether voluntarily or as a result of a requirement to withdraw, is subsequently no longer considered to be an enrolled student of Queen's University. There is no opportunity for students to take a leave of absence from the Program, except in extraordinary circumstances.
Following withdrawal from the Program, former students may apply for re-admission. It is important to note that prior admission to the Program is not a guarantee of future re-admission. To initiate an application for re-admission, former students must submit all documents and materials required by the admissions procedures in place at the time of their application for re-admission.
In some cases a student who has withdrawn will be re-admitted on Academic Probation. Students who withdraw while on Academic Probation will continue on Probation if they are re-admitted to the Program. Students who have been required to withdraw from the Program will not normally be re-admitted to the Program.
Depending on the date of withdrawal and the fees already paid, a participant who withdraws from the Program may be eligible for a refund of fees as follows:
Program fees are due in full for all completed courses.
For partially completed courses, 50% of the course fee is due up to and including half-way point of the course. After the half-way point of the course, the fee will be prorated based on the length of time the participant is enrolled in the course.
The fee for the projects will be prorated based on the credits earned in non-project courses by the participant at the time of withdrawal.
There will be no refund of in-residence fees incurred.
There will be no refund of advisor fees incurred for individual projects.
The amount allocated for the Global Business Project travel is non-refundable in the event that a participant leaves the program.
For refund calculation purposes the fee per course credit is calculated by the Finance Office. The refund per course is adjusted according to the credit weight of the particular course taken.
Students with Queen’s or Smith scholarships will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
8: FINANCIAL POLICY
Students should consult the Program website or Director for the fee schedule and late payment policies.
8.1 Outstanding Debts
Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Debtors provides that:
Any student with an overdue debt with the University will not be permitted to register or receive examination results, official transcripts or marks reports until the outstanding account is settled in full or until an acceptable arrangement for settling the account is made. In no case will a diploma be released to a student with an outstanding debt with the University.
Students with outstanding debts may also be restricted from registering for, or attending, courses and residential sessions until all debts have been paid in full or an acceptable arrangement for the payment of debt has been reached.
Interest will be charged to the student account on any overdue amount. Interest is calculated on a compound basis. Account queries should be addressed to the Smith Finance Office.
8.2 Trademark and Copyright
Smith School of Business is the owner of its trademarks (logo, name, colours) and custom materials (workbooks, study guides, cases). Smith School of Business retains ownership of all trademarks and copyrights, and students may not duplicate or reproduce these trademarks and copyrights without specific written permission from the Dean of Smith School of Business and the Program Director. This is particularly important regarding the use of the logo, which may not be reproduced on clothing or other materials without the prior written consent of the Dean and the Program Director. The School assumes no responsibility for any costs incurred by students who proceed to use the School logo without receiving prior written permission. Persons who use the School trademark and copyrights without permission will be subject to legal action to block usage.
Class of 2026
For students beginning the Full-Time MBA program (FTMBA) in January 2025.
1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
The purpose of the Academic Calendar is to acquaint students with the academic requirements, regulations, policies, procedures and expectations of the Smith Full-Time MBA Program (FTMBA). It is the responsibility of the student to read and understand the entire Academic Calendar. Questions about any of its contents should be directed to the Program Director.
1.2 Acknowledgement of Territory
Queen’s University in Kingston is situated on traditional Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee Territory. To acknowledge this traditional territory is to recognize its longer history, one predating the establishment of the earliest European colonies. It is also to acknowledge this territory’s significance for the Indigenous peoples who lived, and continue to live, upon it – people whose practices and spiritualities were tied to the land and continue to develop in relationship to the territory and its other inhabitants today. The Kingston Indigenous community continues to reflect the area’s Anishinaabek and Haudenosaunee roots. There is also a significant Métis community and there are First Peoples from other Nations across Turtle Island present today.
2: PROGRAM CURRICULUM AND GRADING
2.1 Jurisdiction
Students of Smith School of Business at Queen’s University are governed by the regulations, policies and practices of this institution.
Degree Students are enrolled at Queen’s University and are therefore subject to the policies, regulations, and requirements of Queen’s. Students going on exchange are also subject to the policies, regulations and requirements of their exchange university for courses taken at that university.
It is the responsibility of every student in the Program to read and understand these policies, regulations, and requirements as well as those of their home, and exchange universities.
2.2 Program Format
The Queen’s Program is approved by the Senate and Board of Trustees of the University, and by the Ontario Council for Graduate Studies. Upon graduation, students receive a Master of Business Administration Degree.
The Smith MBA program provides students with the optimal balance of technical skills and the professional competencies employers are looking for.
2.2.1 Program Delivery
The Smith Full-Time MBA program holds classes five days a week at Goodes Hall on the Queen’s University campus in Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
2.3 Timeframe
Once registered in the Program, the student is expected to complete all degree requirements without interruption. The Program is normally completed in 12 consecutive months, beginning in January and ending in December. Foundations (core) curriculum is undertaken from January to June each year. From late June to December, students select elective courses to compliment and customize their MBA experience.
2.4 Degree Requirements and Courses
The Smith Full-Time MBA Program is a 12-month program in which students complete the equivalent of 60 units, including the equivalent of 39 required units and 21 elective units. To be eligible for graduation, students must complete all courses in the Program in the year in which they are registered, and uphold and/or meet each of the Academic Regulations (Section 4 of this document).
2.4.1 Required and Elective Courses
All required and elective courses for the Program must be completed at Queen’s, or at an approved partner institution, in the year that the student is registered in the Program.
Students must adhere to the Program’s add/drop policy and deadlines for any changes to course registrations. The Program Sessional Dates include applicable add/drop dates.
The add/drop policy of the host university will apply for courses taken at partner institutions.
2.4.1.1 Required Courses
All students must complete the following required courses in accordance with the Academic Regulations and Standing set out in Section 4 of this document.
MODULE ONE
MBAS 834 Communications & Professional Skills
MBAS 850 Leading With Integrity
MBAS 811 Financial Accounting
MBAS 860 Business Analytics
MBAS 851 Negotiations & Conflict Management
MBAS 890 Integrated Project
MBAS 894 Career Services Course
MODULE TWO
MBAS 852 Managing Human Capital
MBAS 821 Finance Fundamentals
MBAS 832 Business & Corporate Strategy
MBAS 801 Economics and Industry Analysis
MBAS 854 Business, Government & the Global Economy
MODULE THREE
MBAS 840 Managing Information Technology
MBAS 831 Marketing Fundamentals
MBAS 841 Operations & Supply Chain Management
2.4.1.2 Elective Courses
Students must complete 21 elective units in the Program.
MBAS 843 New Venture Management
MBAS 883 Dynamic Strategy Analysis
MBAS 839 Strategic Problem Solving & Insights
MBAS 822 Finance Strategy
MBAS 871 Financing of New Ventures
MBAS 846 Digital Transformation
MBAS 812 Management Accounting
MBAS 802 Organizational Intelligence & Strategy
MBAS 823 Corporate Valuation & Mergers and Acquisitions
MBAS 844 Managing Agile Projects
MBAS 836 Creating & Executing Market-Based Strategy
MBAS 835 Consumer Focused Marketing
MBAS 861 Analytical Decision Making
MBAS 853 Strategy Implementation & Change
MBAS 824 Investments to Advanced Portfolio Management
MBAS 881 Global Strategy
MBAS 837 Sales Management
MBAS 842 Digital Execution
MBAS 803 Decision-Making in Competitive Environments
MBAS 855 Diversity and Inclusion in Organizations
MBAS 893 Tri-Colour Venture Fund
MBAS 891 Individual Project Course (Mandatory)
2.4.2 Other Components
Students must complete a Career Services Course, in which students receive a pass or fail grade.
2.4.3 International Exchange
Students must be in Good Academic Standing (see Section 4) to participate in an international exchange.
2.4.3.1 Transfer Credits
Students are granted transfer credits that indicate an unspecified (UNSP) Queen’s equivalent to the courses taken on exchange (MIB course = MGBL UNSP; MBA course =MBAS UNSP), as well as the equivalent weight of the courses. Specific grades earned on exchange are not shown on the Queen’s transcript. Students receive a transcript from the host institution which includes course names and grades.
2.4.4 Course Substitutions
Students must complete all required and elective courses at Queen’s (or approved partner institution) within the required timeframe to graduate from the Program.
If extenuating circumstances prevent a student from completing the Program in the required timeframe, the student will be required to complete outstanding courses as directed by the Program Director or Academic Progress Committee. Normally, if one or more of the missed courses is not offered again in the year the student is registered in the Program, the student will be permitted to take the course in the subsequent year when the course is offered again.
2.4.5 Credits Earned Toward an MBA
The Curriculum for the Graduate Diploma in Business (GDB) consists of eight – ten courses, all of which may be applied as credit courses towards completion of an MBA degree from Smith School of Business, Queen’s University under the Full-Time MBA program.
A graduate of the Smith School of Business Graduate Diploma in Business must meet the following in order to continue into the Smith Full-Time MBA Program:
- Have successfully completed the Program and received a Graduate Diploma in Business;
- Meet the requirements for admissions to the Full-Time MBA program in place at the time of application to the Full-Time MBA program;
- Have a minimum GPA of 2.7 in the Graduate Diploma in Business; and
- Not have violated any of the Academic Regulations of the GDB Program.
Some of the courses in the Graduate Diploma in Business may, subject to meeting requirements of admission to a graduate level program offered by Smith School of Business, be applied towards credit in other graduate degree programs offered by Smith School of Business.
Credits earned in the GDB will be valid for a maximum period of 10 years from the date earned to the date applied, in accordance with the terms above, towards credit to a graduate degree offered by Smith School of Business.
Tuition for any graduate degree that a student pursues will be adjusted to take into account fees paid for units earned in the Graduate Diploma in Business.
2.4.6 Auditing Courses
A student may request to audit a course. A formal written request to audit must be made to the Program Director at least seven days before the first session of the course to be audited. Requests to audit courses will be considered depending on space, professor approval and other relevant course-specific factors.
2.5 Learning Teams
Learning Teams are a foundation of the Smith Full-Time MBA Program. The Learning Team is critical to a student’s success in the Program as well as being a means of managing the demanding workload of the Program. It also provides an opportunity to draw on the varied backgrounds and expertise of other team members and enriches the student’s learning experience as a whole. Most courses allocate approximately 50% of the course weight to teamwork.
Students are assigned to a Learning Team at the beginning of the Program. It is a Program requirement that students function effectively and supportively within their Learning Teams and make effective and ethical use of team resources in satisfying course requirements. Learning Teams remain intact for the first six months (core) of the Program; however, additional “teams” are formed for elective courses in the Program.
2.5.1 Performance in the Learning Team
Performance in the Learning Team is an academic requirement for successful completion of the Program (see Section 4.1). Students must perform effectively and supportively on the Team according to the standards and norms of the Team. Failure to do so can result in a requirement to withdraw from the Program.
2.5.2 Team Coaches
In order to get the best experience on the Learning Team, each team is assigned a professionally trained Team Coach. The Team Coach works regularly with the team and its individual members throughout the Program delivering best practices, instruction, advice, and coaching on team processes, development, and performance. Team coaches may also work with a team on interpersonal issues or concerns with regard to the performance (effectiveness) or behaviour (supportiveness) of individual team members.
2.6 Grading
2.6.1 Queen's University Grading
The grading system for courses in the Queen's Program is:
Other academic entries which may be assigned are:
* Aegrotat: An academic entry which provides an estimated final grade or, if that is not possible, credit for a course without a grade because of extenuating circumstances beyond the student’s control that prevented the student from completing all work of the course, particularly the final examination. Normally at least 60 per cent of the work to be evaluated in the course (assignments, midterms, final examination, as specified in the course) must have been completed.
Requests for AG or CR standing should be made to the Program Director.
2.6.2 Grading Specifications
All final marks, including those assigned after special examinations, may be based on the results of formal examinations and on grades obtained from other work throughout the course, which may include essays, exercises, reports, presentations, class tests/quizzes, and class participation or other work.
At the beginning of each course, the professor will provide a clear statement of the basis on which the final mark will be assessed. All work assigned and the weight that it will contribute to the final mark will be specified. Normally there is both individual and team work included in course assessments.
2.6.3 Class Participation
Class participation grades are allocated in some courses. Professors will specify the specific form and opportunities for participation marks at the start of the course. Some examples include contributions to class discussions or discussion boards, attendance, timely completion of assigned work, or other relevant behaviors determined by the professor.
3: ACADEMIC REGULATIONS AND STANDING
Academic Regulations exist to maintain the standards of the Program, and to ensure the candidates of the Program have the mandatory knowledge and experience to merit receiving the Degree. Degrees are awarded according to the requirements and processes set out in the Academic Regulations.
Every student is responsible for knowing and meeting or upholding the Academic Regulations of the Program in order to progress through the Program and ultimately be eligible for the Degree. The Academic Regulations below are currently in effect. Regulations are consistently reviewed and may change from time to time. Any changes that take place during the academic year will be communicated to students; it remains the student’s responsibility to be aware of any such changes.
3.1 Academic Regulations
Each candidate for the Degree must successfully meet or achieve the Regulations below in order to be in Good Academic Standing, to progress through the Program, and to be eligible for graduation from the Program. In a case where a student violates any one of the Regulations, that student is normally required to withdraw from the Program (see Section 4.2 for further information).
Every student must achieve the following:
3.1.1 Complete Program Curriculum
The student must complete all components of the curriculum as outlined in Section 2.
3.1.2 Overall Minimum GPA
The student must achieve a cumulative GPA of at least 2.7 (B-) including all courses taken in the Program.
3.1.3 Minimum Course Grades
The student may obtain final grades of less than 2.0 (C) in no more than the equivalent of 2 courses (6 units) throughout the Program.
3.1.4 No Failures
The student must obtain a final grade of at least 0.7 (D-) in all courses.
3.1.5 Pass Individual Performance
The student must obtain a grade of at least 0.7 (D-) in the assessment of individual performance of any course. Course professors will determine how individual performance is assessed in their course.
3.1.6 Pass Team Performance
The student must obtain a grade of at least 0.7 (D-) on the assessment of team performance of any course. Course professors will determine how team performance is assessed in their course.
3.1.7 Function in Learning Team
The student must function effectively and supportively in the Learning Team throughout the duration of the Program. The Program Director will determine whether the student is functioning effectively and supportively as per Section 3.2.2.1.
3.1.8 Attendance
The student may not miss more than 25% of class sessions of any course.
Class attendance is monitored, and concerns related to attendance will be addressed with the student. Note that repeated unexcused absences from class may also impact the assessment of performance in the Learning Team.
3.2 Academic Standing
Faculty boards or delegated bodies have jurisdiction to deal with issues of Academic Standing. Subject to a student’s right of appeal, if a student is not meeting the requirements of their program, a faculty board has the authority to issue a Requirement to Withdraw for Academic Performance, indicating the required transcript notation in accordance with the Policy on Transcript Terminology for Students Withdrawing from Queen’s University.
Academic standing means the standard used to determine or measure a student’s eligibility to remain and/or progress in a program, as determined by the academic regulations of the student’s Faculty, School or program. The following Academic Standings may apply, depending on individual circumstances:
3.2.1 Good Academic Standing
In order to progress through the Program and to be eligible for the Degree, a student must be in Good Academic Standing. A student is considered to be in Good Academic Standing when they uphold the Academic Regulations set out in Section 3.1 above.
A student who fails to uphold any one of the Academic Regulations is no longer in Good Academic Standing, and is normally required to withdraw from the Program. The student is considered to be in Academic Jeopardy until a decision is made by the appropriate body.
3.2.2 Academic Jeopardy
A student who fails to meet one or more of the Academic Regulations is deemed to be in Academic Jeopardy until a decision is made about their situation by the appropriate body.
Students in this situation will first be reviewed by the Program Director. In some cases, an informal resolution may be possible (for example, an opportunity to re-take an exam if the student has official evidence of being gravely ill on the day of the exam) and, if successful, the student may return to Good Academic Standing.
In cases where an informal resolution is not possible, the Program Director will inform the student in writing of the requirement to withdraw from the Program, subject to the student’s right of appeal to the Academic Progress Committee (Section 6, Academic Decisions and Appeals).
3.2.2.1 Academic Jeopardy Resulting from Failure to Function in the Learning Team
As established in the Academic Regulations, Section 3.1.6 Function in Learning Team, a student must function effectively and supportively in the Learning Team (Section 2.5) throughout the duration of the Program. Effective and supportive behaviour as a team member includes meeting the standards of performance and behaviour determined by the Team in conjunction with the Team Coach, as well as full cooperation and responsive communication with the Team Coach.
When significant concerns regarding a student’s Learning Team performance is brought to a Team Coach, the Team Coach will investigate the situation fully and fairly. The Team Coach will:
- Discuss the situation with each student on the Learning Team, including the student whose performance or behaviour is in question.
- Identify the Learning Team’s established performance, operational and behavioural norms and expectations.
- Discuss with the student in question any failure to meet the team norms or expectations, and, if necessary:
- Establish a set of formal expectations, in the form of a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) that must be achieved by the student within a specified period in order to fulfill the obligation to perform as an effective and supportive team member.
A student operating under a formal set of performance expectations outlined in a PIP is in Academic Jeopardy. If the student successfully completes the PIP, the student is once again considered to be in Good Academic Standing.
If, after a thorough investigation, the Director of Team Coaching determines that the student has not successfully completed the PIP, the Director of Team Coaching will refer the matter to the Program Director for review. If the student is deemed to have violated Regulation 3.1.6, the student will be required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal to the Academic Progress Committee (Section 6).
3.2.3 Academic Probation
A student who has failed to meet one or more of the Academic Regulations, and who has successfully appealed to the Academic Progress Committee (Section 6) may be permitted to continue in the Program, on Academic Probation, subject to specific terms, conditions, standards and timeframes tailored to the situation.
A student who successfully completes the conditions of their Academic Probation will be released from Academic Probation and return to Good Academic Standing. A student who fails to meet the conditions of their Academic Probation will normally be required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal (Section 6).
3.2.4 Requirement to Withdraw
A student who has failed to meet any one or more of the Academic Regulations is normally required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal (see Section 6). Further, a student who fails to meet the conditions of their Academic Probation will normally be required to withdraw from the Program.
3.2.5 Effective Date of Sanctions, Penalty, or Requirement to Withdraw
Sanctions or adverse academic decisions, such as Academic Probation (and its terms and conditions), penalties or a requirement to withdraw, shall take effect in accordance with Sections 33 and 34 of Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Academic Appeals Policy:
(33) Ordinarily, no sanction, penalty, or requirement to withdraw shall be put into effect until the student affected has either exhausted all channels of appeal or the time for filing an appeal has expired and no appeal has been filed. For the purpose of this provision, the University will normally consider an adverse academic decision to be a sanction.
(34) Notwithstanding paragraph 33, if an academic unit determines that the interests of third parties may be prejudiced by the continued enrolment of a student in a course or program, the unit may decide that, pending an appeal from an adverse academic decision, the student should not be permitted to continue in their course or program or should be precluded from progressing to the next academic stage. A student who is subject to an immediate sanction under this paragraph may request that the Chair of the appellate body with jurisdiction over the matter expedite the appeal. This request may result in a direct abridging the time for filing of documents, or other interim or preliminary directions.
The Commentary to s.34 reads:
Some academic experiences involve student interaction with third parties or may be subject to laws and regulations such as those governing professions (such as those subject to the Regulated Health Professions Act and the Medicine Act). For example, and without limiting other possible circumstances, there are placement requirements in Education and mandated clinical placements in the Schools of Medicine, Nursing, and Rehabilitative Therapy, where the interests of third parties would justify immediate suspension of a student from a course or portion of a program pending the outcome of an appeal process. In programs involving intensive group work, the interests of other students might also justify such a suspension pending the outcome of an appeal process.
3.2.5.1 Effective Date Of Sanctions for Failure to Function in the Learning Team
The Program Director may determine that an adverse academic decision (e.g., requirement to withdraw) as a result of the violation of Regulation 4.1.6 (Function in the Learning Team) requires that a student’s participation in the team be halted during the appeal process to ensure that the interests of third parties (e.g., the learning experience and academic evaluation of the other members of the Learning Team) are not adversely affected. The student may be permitted to continue in the Program to the extent feasible until all levels of appeal are exhausted. However, in certain circumstances, the student may not be permitted to continue in the Program in accordance with SAAP s.34.
4: ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS
4.1 Academic Integrity
Queen’s University is dedicated to creating a scholarly community free to explore a range of ideas, to build and advance knowledge, and to share the ideas and knowledge that emerge from a range of intellectual pursuits.
Queen’s students, faculty, administrators, and staff therefore all have responsibilities for supporting and upholding the fundamental values of academic integrity. Academic integrity is a commitment to the fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, and responsibility. Academic integrity concerns refer to issues that arise which deserve attention, and which may or may not, in the end, involve a departure from academic integrity, that is, a departure from these fundamental values. This involves what has traditionally been referred to as academic dishonesty but encompasses a much broader context to include educational measures associated with academic integrity. Academic integrity is constituted by the five core fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility (see Academic Integrity Policy) and by the quality of courage. These values and qualities are central to the building, nurturing and sustaining of an academic community in which all members of the community will thrive. Adherence to the values expressed through academic integrity forms a foundation for the "freedom of inquiry and exchange of ideas" essential to the intellectual life of the University.
The following statements from “The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity” (2nd edition), developed by the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI), contextualize these values and qualities:
Honesty: Academic communities of integrity advance the quest for truth and knowledge through intellectual and personal honesty in learning, teaching, research, and service.
Trust: Academic communities of integrity both foster and rely upon climates of mutual trust. Climates of trust encourage and support the free exchange of ideas which in turn allows scholarly inquiry to reach its fullest potential.
Fairness: Academic communities of integrity establish clear and transparent expectations, standards, and practices to support fairness in the interactions of students, faculty, and administrators.
Respect: Academic communities of integrity value the interactive, cooperative, participatory nature of learning. They honor, value, and consider diverse opinions and ideas.
Responsibility: Academic communities of integrity rest upon foundations of personal accountability coupled with the willingness of individuals and groups to lead by example, uphold mutually agreed- upon standards, and take action when they encounter wrongdoing.
Courage: To develop and sustain communities of integrity, it takes more than simply believing in the fundamental values. Translating the values from talking points into action -- standing up for them in the face of pressure and adversity — requires determination, commitment, and courage.
Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with and adhering to the regulations concerning academic integrity. General information on academic integrity is available at Academic Integrity - Queen's University, along with School specific information in the Smith Academic Integrity Policy.
4.1.1 Departures from Academic Integrity
A departure from academic integrity involves any departure from the six fundamental values described above and includes any deliberate attempt to gain unfair advantage academically for oneself or others. All forms of departure from academic integrity are considered serious offences within the University community. Faculty boards or their delegated bodies have jurisdiction to deal with issues of academic integrity concerns and to impose sanctions when they find a departure from academic integrity has occurred. Departures from academic integrity other than a course-related issue (e.g., falsifying a transcript) are dealt with by the Faculty/School in which the student is registered. The Smith Academic Integrity Policy governs academic integrity processes at the Smith School of Business. The following defines the domain of relevant acts without providing an exhaustive list:
4.1.1.1 Plagiarism
Allowing it to be thought that another's ideas or phrasings are one's own by failing to provide proper acknowledgement. Some examples are:
- Copying and pasting from the internet
- Copying a printed source or other resource without proper acknowledgement
- Copying from another student in the same or different year of the Program or another Program
- Copying from another’s test paper
- Using direct quotations or large sections of paraphrased material in an assignment without appropriate acknowledgement
- Buying term papers or other assignments and submitting them as one's own
- Submitting the same piece of work in more than one course without the permission of the instructors
- Obtaining a copy of, or information about, a test or exam from an earlier section of the course and writing the test or exam later in the day or subsequent days.
4.1.1.2 Use of unauthorized materials
- Possessing or using unauthorized study materials or aids during a test
- Copying from another's test paper
- Using an unauthorized calculator or other aids during a test
- Unauthorized removal of materials from the library, or deliberate concealment of library materials
- Obtaining materials such as answer keys and using them to obtain an unfair advantage.
4.1.1.3 Facilitation
- Enabling another's breach of academic integrity
- Making information available to another student, such as knowingly allowing one's essay or assignment to be copied by someone else, giving a copy of a test or exam to a student writing the same test or exam later in the day or subsequent days
- Selling or distributing term papers or other assignments
- Knowingly assisting another person to conceal their departure from academic integrity.
4.1.1.4 Unauthorized collaboration
- Working with others, without the specific permission of the instructor, on assignments that will be submitted for a grade
- This applies to in-class or take-home tests, papers, or homework assignments. Students may not collaborate without the instructor’s authorization.
4.1.1.5 Forgery
1. Utilizing counterfeit documents or statements (e.g. creating or altering a transcript, medical note or other official documents).
4.1.1.6 Falsification
- Misrepresentation of one's self, one's work or one's relation to the University
- Altering transcripts or other official documents relating to student records
- Impersonating someone in an examination or test
- Submitting a take-home examination written, in whole or in part, by someone else
- Fabricating or falsifying research data or source material (whether by commission or by omission)
- Allowing someone else to do research work without the knowledge and approval of the instructor
- Failing to appropriately recognize contributions of others
- Attributing authorship of work to persons other than those who have contributed to the work in a meaningful way.
4.1.2 Process for Investigating Suspected Departures from Academic Integrity
The Smith School of Business Academic Integrity sets out complete procedures and processes for handling suspected departures from academic integrity. Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with the Queens and Smith School of Business Academic Integrity policies.
The following outlines the steps to follow in investigating possible departures from academic integrity and making findings. There are four steps to this process:
- Collection of evidence
- Investigation of possible departure from academic integrity
- Assessment of sanction, and
- Students may appeal a finding of a departure from Academic Integrity.
To begin investigating a possible departure from academic integrity, the instructor assembles all documents related to the case. While collecting evidence, the instructor can seek guidance from the Smith Dean's office concerning matters relating to departures from academic integrity and the Smith Academic Integrity policy. When discussing possible departures from academic integrity, the instructor ensures that the student's identity remains confidential, pending a finding of departure from academic integrity.
Normally, where a course professor has a concern about a possible departure from academic integrity, the professor will notify the student in writing (via a Notice of Investigation – “NOI”) and investigate in accordance with Smith School of Business Investigation of possible departure from academic integrity procedures .
Within 10 days of receiving the NOI, the student must make an initial response to the instructor, either to schedule a meeting or to indicate that he/she does not wish to meet and will provide a written response. If the student wishes to meet, the instructor should ask who else, if anyone, will accompany the student. If the student appears with legal counsel without prior notice, the instructor should re-schedule the meeting and contact the Smith Dean’s Office for support.
In most instances, the instructor will meet with the student to discuss the possible departure from academic integrity. At the meeting, the student will have the opportunity to respond to the investigation. If the student wishes, they may offer a written submission in addition to attending the meeting and may bring an advisor.
Procedures for dealing with academic integrity concerns in the Smith School of Business are governed by the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. After considering the available evidence, the instructor will determine if it is sufficient for a finding of departure from academic integrity. Also, to be considered are the student’s previous history, and mitigating circumstances. Mitigating circumstances do not exonerate or excuse from the finding of a departure from academic integrity, but these factors may be considered to ensure that the imposed sanction is fair, reasonable and proportionate to the gravity of the departure found. The decision must outline the evidence supporting reliance on the mitigating circumstances. The onus is on the student to adduce evidence of mitigating circumstances. Conflicts of evidence and issues of credibility on pivotal issues must be resolved, and a finding of fact made concerning the version of events before the finding of a departure from academic integrity can be made. The decision should be made within 14 days of meeting with the student (or receiving their written submission), or within a reasonable period as demanded by the complexity of the case.
In cases where there is no finding of departure from academic integrity: If, after a careful investigation of the evidence and consideration of the response by the student, the instructor determines that there are no grounds for a finding of departure from academic integrity, all documents related to the case are destroyed and the instructor informs the student that the investigation has been dropped using the Notice of File Closure form.
In cases where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity: If, after a careful investigation of the evidence and consideration of the response by the student, the instructor determines that there is sufficient and persuasive evidence to make a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor must complete a Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity form and determine an appropriate sanction or remedy. Up to this point, a record of previous departures from academic integrity is not relevant in making a finding of departure from academic integrity.
Where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor must first contact the Dean's Office to determine if there is a previous finding for the student. If a previous finding exists, the case will be referred to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel for the assignment of an appropriate sanction.
4.1.3 Assessment of Sanction
Where there is a finding of departure from academic integrity, the instructor consults with the Dean’s Office. If the Dean’s Office reports a previous finding exists, the instructor refers the matter to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel for the assignment of an appropriate sanction. If there is no academic integrity record on file in the Smith Dean’s Office, the instructor may assign a remedy or sanction appropriate to the extent or severity of the offense. When considering the remedy or sanction, the instructor considers several factors in assessing the gravity of the remedial measure or sanction to be imposed. Additional information can be found on the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity website.
Following the investigation of the suspected departure from Academic Integrity, the professor will either: i) make a finding of a departure from academic integrity and impose a sanction (or consult with the Smith Academic Integrity Panel for sanction); or ii) determine there was no departure from Academic Integrity, notify the student the investigation has been dropped and destroy all documents related to the case.
After making the finding and setting a sanction within the scope of those available to the instructor, the instructor must inform the student in writing of the decision. If the finding appears to warrant a sanction more serious than the instructor may impose, or if there is a previous finding of a departure from academic integrity on file in the Smith Dean’s Office, the case shall be referred to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel.
Any student who is found to have committed a violation of academic integrity may face a range of sanctions, including but not limited to:
- An oral or written warning that such infractions constitute unacceptable behaviour (Note that an oral warning must still be documented on the Finding of a Departure from Academic Integrity form)
- A learning experience involving a rewriting or revision of the original piece of work
- The submission of a new piece of work
- The completion of other work
- The deduction of partial or total marks for the assignment/exam
- A failing grade (down to a grade of zero) in the course.
If the penalty amounts to a failure in the course, the student may not drop the course, regardless of the drop deadlines.
In the case of a referral to the Smith Academic Integrity Panel, the Panel may impose sanctions ranging from those noted above to a recommendation to Senate that the student be required to withdraw from the University.
Records of findings of departures from Academic Integrity are kept in the Dean’s Office and in the Program Office.
4.2 Illness and Extenuating Circumstances Policies
4.2.1 Illness
A student who claims illness as a reason for missing academic obligations is responsible for informing the professor and the Program Director and may be required to provide evidence of illness.
Students who are too ill to attend class must notify the professor and the Program administration prior to the beginning of class. A student suffering from a short-term illness should submit a Self-Declaration of Illness form.
A notification of absence from an exam must be accompanied by documentation as follows:
- in cases of illness when a student is under the care of a physician, the student should provide a note from the physician. Retroactive doctors’ notes (i.e. notes obtained from physicians after the illness) are not acceptable.
- If a student is ill, but not under the care of a physician prior and during an exam, they can provide a Self-Declaration of Illness form.
As a matter of academic integrity, a student is responsible for making an honest declaration concerning the nature of their illness and its impact on their academic obligations. False declarations may be investigated under the Smith Academic Integrity Policy.
4.2.2 Extenuating Circumstances
The Program adheres to Queen’s policy on Academic Consideration for Students in Extenuating Circumstances Policy and the principle of a good faith response to requests for consideration. The policy enables students with extenuating circumstances to request academic consideration in a fair, reasonable and consistent manner.
Extenuating circumstances means a personal circumstance beyond the student’s control that has a direct and substantial impact on the student’s ability to meet essential academic requirements or standards. Extenuating circumstances include but are not limited to a sudden or acute physical or mental illness, serious injury to self or significant others, bereavement, a traumatic event, or other serious personal/family crisis. Extenuating circumstances may also include officially representing the university at a sanctioned event or through an invitation to participate in an event as a distinguished guest (e.g. national tournament, Olympics). Extenuating circumstances do not include personal or family events (e.g., holidays, weddings), academic or exam stress, or transportation or technological difficulties.
There are three extenuating circumstances levels, a student who is unable to satisfy the requirements of a course or the Program due to extenuating circumstances must notify the Program Director in writing as soon as possible.
Level 1: Brief Absence Students who require an unplanned brief absence from academic obligations for a period of up to 48 hours. Instructors and Faculty/School Offices have discretion to extend academic considerations for an unplanned Brief Absence beyond 48 hours if they deem it appropriate in situations where recovery requires additional days. In cases where a student who submitted a Self-Declaration of Brief Absence is not able to return to full academic functioning within a few days, the student should submit a Request for Academic Consideration for Extenuating Circumstances.
Level 2: Short Term Extenuating Circumstances Students who require academic consideration for a short-term period defined as more than 48 hours (with discretion for an additional one or two days) but less than 3 months. This applies to extenuating circumstances where the student anticipates a full recovery and return to previous levels of academic functioning within the next 3 months. This applies to extenuating circumstances that lead to a reduced ability to meet academic requirements due to physical or mental impairment. This includes an extended unanticipated illness (e.g., mononucleosis, pneumonia), a serious injury (e.g., concussion, broken bones), a required treatment (surgical procedure, significant side effects from new medication), serious injury or illness to a significant other, bereavement (e.g., loss of family member), traumatic event, or another significant personal crisis.
Students who are unable to meet academic obligations due to functional impairments and limitations related to a known underlying disability or diagnosed health condition should register with Queen’s Student Accessibility Services to receive ongoing academic accommodations tailored to their individual needs. Academic considerations should be individualized to the student’s circumstances and in proportion to the student’s ability to complete academic requirements. Depending on the ability of the student to engage in academic tasks and the nature of the program the student is in and related academic requirements, short term extenuating circumstances may require withdrawing from a course (or courses) or may require a medical leave of absence.
Level 3: Long-term Extenuating circumstances. Students who do not anticipate a full recovery or return to academic functioning within 3 months should speak with their Faculty / School Offices immediately to discuss academic implications and possible academic considerations (e.g., reduced course load, medical leave of absence). Students should take reasonable measures to promote academic success and their personal well-being by accessing available supports, including Queen’s Student Accessibility Services, Health and/or Counselling Services, and other campus supports or personal /professional supports as appropriate.
Students who anticipate a return to academic functioning but with ongoing need for academic accommodation should contact Queen’s Student Accessibility Services (QSAS) to register for ongoing academic accommodations. Students will need to provide documentation to QSAS related to their functional impairments.
Students seeking academic accommodations related to a chronic or ongoing physical or mental health condition or an existing disability should refer to the existing policy on Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities. Students with long term health conditions or disability should seek academic accommodation from Queen’s Student Accessibility Services in Student Wellness Services.
Privacy and confidentiality will be protected and maintained throughout this process to the extent possible. Information may be shared among university personal (e.g., faculty offices, instructors, exams office) on a need-to-know basis for the purpose of arranging academic considerations. Confidentiality cannot be maintained where there is reason to believe that an individual may be at risk of harming themselves or others.
In cases where a student is unable to act, a delegate may act on behalf of the student, with the student’s written consent.
Students are expected to request academic considerations as soon as extenuating circumstances are apparent. Requests for retroactive consideration should be directed to the Faculty/School Office and will be assessed on a case-by-case basis.
For extenuating circumstances relating to sexual violence or harassment and discrimination, students can contact the Sexual Violence Prevention and Response Co-ordinator, the Human Rights Office, or Student Wellness Services, for support and for the facilitation of appropriate arrangements. The Policy on Sexual Violence Involving Queen’s University Students supersedes these procedures.
Students should submit the appropriate extenuating circumstances form(s).
If the student is requesting an alternate means of satisfying the Program requirements, a formal written request should be submitted to the Program Director. The request should include an explanation of the connection between the effects of the extenuating circumstances and the student’s academic performance, as well as the remedy being proposed.
The Program Director will respond to the student’s request for consideration promptly. The Program is committed to responding to students in a fair and consistent manner, considering the specific individual circumstances. The Program is also committed to upholding academic standards and ensuring that essential academic requirements are met.
If an instructor or supervisor does not assent to the request for academic consideration in extenuating circumstances made by a graduate student, academic consideration may nonetheless be granted, unless the instructor or supervisor provides justifiable reasons for withholding his or her assent. The decision to grant or deny the academic consideration shall be made by the Associate Dean of the School of Graduate Studies.
4.2.3 Official Documentation
Level 1 documentation: The university does not require verification documentation from a health care professional (on-campus or hospital or community-based) in these circumstances.
Level 2 documentation: Students may be required to provide verification documentation. This may include the Verification of Personal Health Condition form, a Verification of Confidential Extenuating Circumstances form, or other documentation (e.g., death certification, police report of an accident). Students are not required to disclose specific details of their personal circumstances to their instructors or supervisors, but the Faculty/School Office may require documentation that verifies the extenuating circumstance and the inability or reduced capacity to complete academic work. In cases where a Verification of Confidential Extenuating Circumstances form has been submitted, additional documentation or detail is not required. Official documentation, including notes from health care professionals, need not outline the specific details of the student’s condition, but must clearly indicate ways in which the circumstances directly affect the student’s performance, and verify that these effects were substantial enough to cause the academic disruption. Information about the start, duration and present state of the condition or circumstances, as well as 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, are essential.
Level 3 documentation: Documentation may include Self-declaration forms, requests for academic consideration forms, verification of Confidential Extenuating Circumstances form or other documentation (determined on a case-by-case basis).
A student’s privacy and confidentiality are maintained throughout this process to the extent possible. Information may be shared among university personal (e.g., instructors or supervisors, exams office) on a need-to-know basis for the purpose of arranging academic considerations. Documentation collected as part of this policy will not be part of a student’s permanent academic record.
Documents submitted may be verified by the Program administration. False statements or documents may be investigated in accordance with the Smith Policy on Academic Integrity.
4.2.4 Unresolved Circumstances
The appeals and consideration process does not compensate for circumstances that the student is unable to resolve, or for which the student is unwilling to actively seek accommodation. In addition, the appeals process does not compensate for circumstances that are actively being accommodated, for example where a student’s permanent disabilities are being accommodated through Queen’s Student Accessibility Services Office.
Multiple appeals citing the same 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. In order for such an appeal to succeed, there must be convincing evidence that the circumstances that affected the student’s academic performance will be resolved within a reasonable timeline, or will be appropriately managed on an ongoing basis.
4.3 Language
In accordance with Queen’s University Language Policy, examinations and assignments are to be submitted in English, except where a Faculty Board has approved an alternative practice or where a special agreement has been entered into between the Program and a student.
4.4 Acceptable Use of Information Technology Resources Policy
All members of the Queen’s community are bound by the Queen’s policy on the Acceptable Use of Information Technology (IT) Resources. The policy states:
The use of Queen's University information technology (IT) resources must be consistent with the academic mission of the University. These IT resources are provided to support the teaching, learning, research and administrative activities of the Queen's community. As a member or guest of the Queen's community, you may have access to valuable internal and external networks and resources, and Sensitive Information, and you are expected to use these resources in a responsible, ethical, and legal manner. Your actions should not adversely affect the ability of others to use these resources or compromise the security and privacy of sensitive information.
4.4.1 Submission of Electronic Assignments
Students are required to submit all assignments electronically. It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that all electronic submissions have been submitted properly and are corruption-free.
Any assignment that is detected to be carrying a corrupt file will be immediately destroyed, and the student must re-submit the assignment corruption-free. If the assignment is not re-submitted before the assignment deadline it will be marked “late.”
4.5 Examinations
4.5.1 Access to Examinations
The term final examination paper refers to the final examination question paper in a course together with the graded answer paper written by the student. These documents, in accordance with the Senate Policy on Student Access to Final Examination Papers, must be retained by the professor or the School for a period of 12 months.
4.5.1.1 Informal Access
Professors may informally review the final examination paper with a student who requests it and are encouraged to do so. However, access may not be granted before the final marks are released.
4.5.1.2 Formal Access
A student may obtain access to their final exam as part of an appeal process. This may be supervised access to, or a copy of, the final examination paper. The student should contact the Program administration to arrange for formal access to their final exam.
4.5.2 Changes to Examination Times
Requests for changes to an individual examination time must be made to the Program Director as soon as the student is aware of a conflict. Normally, such requests will only be granted if extenuating circumstances (beyond the student’s control) will prevent the student from writing the exam at the scheduled time.
The exam dates for the courses with exams will be posted well in advance of the date of the exam. The policies regarding exam locations and change of dates are set out below.
- Changes to the preferred exam location can be made up to two weeks prior to any subsequent exam by sending a request in writing to both the Program Manager and the Administrative Coordinator, Assignments and Exams at Queen’s. Students should understand that changes requested within two weeks of the exam may not be permitted.
- All requests for changes to exam dates must meet the following criteria.
- A written request for the change of date must be received by the Program Manager at Queen’s at least two weeks in advance of the exam; the request must clearly state the reason for the change.
- All requests must be approved by the Program administration in consultation with the course professor; this process may require supporting documentation.
- The student requesting the change of exam date must secure their own proctor and secure their own exam location and pay all associated costs. The student will be provided with a list of persons who qualify to be proctors for exams conducted by Queen’s.
- In extenuating circumstances, changes to exam dates may be considered if the criteria set out in 1 and 2 above are not met.
4.6 Queen's University Student Code of Conduct
Queen’s University is dedicated to learning, intellectual inquiry, the dissemination and advancement of knowledge, personal and professional development, and good citizenship. All students are required to read and adhere to Queen’s University Student Code of Conduct and Procedures Under the Queen's University Student Code of Conduct (PDF 250 KB) (2021) Students should refer to the Student Policy Index for more information on all student policies.
Students are expected to adhere to and promote the University’s core values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and personal responsibility in all aspects of University life, academic and non-academic. These core values are intended to inform and guide student conduct as they foster mutual respect for the dignity, property, rights and well-being of others.
As a member of the Queen’s community, every student accepts the University’s policies, rules and procedures and acknowledges the right of the University to set standards of conduct, as well as the right of the University and/or its Authorized Agent(s) to impose sanctions for conduct found to have violated those standards.
4.6.1 Professionalism and Facilities Etiquette
All study and workspaces provided by Smith School of Business should be treated with respect and care. All students are expected to properly reserve space, use the facilities for the purposes for which they are intended, and to leave spaces clean, tidy, in the proper furniture configuration and with the room supplies.
5: ACADEMIC DECISIONS AND APPEALS
Academic Regulations at Queen’s University were designed to ensure that students are being treated fairly and equitably while upholding the academic standards of the institution. On occasion, there are extenuating circumstances that are usually beyond a student’s control that may have impacted their performance at Queen’s. Appeal processes were developed to reconsider the appropriateness of any sanctions or penalties that may have been imposed upon a student who may have extenuating circumstances. Various types of academic decisions may be made by a course professor, Program Director, Academic Progress Committee, Academic Integrity Panel, Academic Appeals Committee and/or the University Student Appeal Board. Admissions decisions are not subject to appeal.
The appeals process at Queen’s University is comprised of several levels of appeal by different appeal bodies. In accordance with the Student Academic Appeals Policy, the decision system is based on the principle that "decisions should generally be made by those who are most familiar with the context”[1] . The Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy reflects the intent of the Senate regarding Student Academic Appeals, which is twofold: To ensure that students receive fair treatment and are aware of their rights and responsibilities and to establish a fair, efficient process for addressing student appeals from academic decisions.
Appeals of academic decisions fall into four possible categories: appeals of grades (Section 5.1), appeals of other academic decisions (Section 5.2), appeals of academic standing and progression decisions (Section 5.3), and appeals of academic integrity decisions (Section 5.4).
Note that it is the student’s responsibility to clearly establish that grounds for an appeal exist as the basis for an appeal. Below the various decision-making bodies and their mandates are explained.
[1] Senate Student Academic Appeals Policy, Introduction (p. 4).
5.1 Appeals of Grades
Grades are determined by course professors. Appeals of grades in courses (including assignments, examination papers, and final grades) are first handled at the course professor level.
Examination papers and course marks of students whose final grade in a course is marginally below a letter grade, and especially below a failing grade, are reviewed with special care by faculty members before such grades are assigned. Therefore, it is unlikely that such a grade is incorrect or unfair to the student. However, if a student feels that a course grade or a portion of it has been unfairly assessed, they should first make an attempt to resolve the issue informally with the professor.
If the student feels that the issue remains unresolved, they should contact the Program Director who will initiate a formal grade review. A review of the assignment or examination shall be conducted by two examiners appointed by the Program Director or designate; one examiner shall be the original professor or grader, if available. The review shall involve a re‐reading of the final examination or deliverable(s) in the course and a review of the student’s course record.
Students are not charged a fee for filing an appeal.
Note that it is the responsibility of the student to preserve all exercises, papers, reports, and other graded material for the course and to submit a copy of these documents with the request for review. The scanned copy of any graded assignment or material returned to a student shall be deemed to be the original document for the purposes of this section.
Note that an appeal may result in no change to the grade, an increase in the grade, or a decrease in the grade. The decision of the examiner(s) is final, and there is no further appeal available.
5.2 Appeals of Other Academic Decisions
The Program Director makes some decisions for students facing special circumstances in the Program. The student should request consideration as appropriate to the Program Director as soon as they are aware of a situation requiring such consideration. Examples of such decisions could include: changing a course registration from one elective to another, or deferring an exam.
Appeals of decisions by the Program Director are made to the Academic Progress Committee.
5.3 Appeals of Academic Standing and Progression Decisions
Students are considered to be in Good Academic Standing unless they have violated one or more of the Academic Regulations of the Program. As noted, students who violate one or more of the Academic Regulations of the Program are normally required to withdraw from the Program. In such a case, the Program Director will normally inform the student in writing that, because of their violation of one or more of the Regulations, they are required to withdraw from the Program.
Appeals of these decisions are made to the Academic Progress Committee.
See below for the Academic Progress Committee’s Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure.
5.3.1 The Academic Progress Committee
Smith School of Business
Master of Business Administration, Master of Management, and Graduate Diploma Programs Academic Progress Committee
Terms of Reference
Adopted by Faculty Board September 12, 2017
1 - Terms of Reference
The Master of Business Administration (“MBA”), Master of Management (“MOM”), and Graduate Diploma (“GD”) Academic Progress Committee is responsible for making decisions about academic progression and other academic matters relating to MBA, MOM and GD students at Smith School of Business. The committee will hereafter be referred to as the “MBA/MOM APC”.
Academic Progress Committee members are knowledgeable about Smith School of Business Master of Business Administration, Master of Management and Graduate Diploma programs, and Queen’s University policies and procedures. The MBA/MOM APC provides a uniform approach in the handling of academic matters across the Smith School of Business professional Masters programs.
2 - Jurisdiction
The Academic Progress Committee (APC) is established by the Smith School of Business Faculty Board to monitor and make decisions about academic matters and the academic progress of Master of Business Administration students in: the Full-Time, Executive, and Accelerated MBA Programs; all Master of Management Programs; and all Graduate Diploma Programs.
The APC considers the cases and special circumstances, if any, of students who appeal a decision regarding the application of the academic regulations, or another academic matter, that has been made at the Program level.
2.1 - No Jurisdiction
The APC does not have jurisdiction to hear appeals of:
- matters related to individual or team assignments and/or exam grades (such appeals are made to the Program Director);
- findings or sanctions related to departures from Academic Integrity (such appeals are heard by the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Panel);
3 - Membership
The MBA/MOM Academic Progress Committee is comprised of a total of seven voting members, all of whom are knowledgeable about the MBA, MOM and GD programs. APC members are faculty members of Smith School of Business and are appointed by the Associate Dean, Faculty. Two faculty members are appointed Co-Chairs.
Members normally hold a term of three years (preferably in staggered terms). New members assume their duties on July 1 of each year.
Hearing Panels of the MBA/MOM APC shall be appointed by the Co-Chair to hear individual student appeals. Hearing Panels shall normally consist of a minimum of three APC members, including one Co-Chair, and a maximum of six APC members, based on availability and any conflict of interest issues.
3.1 - Role of the Co-Chair
The Co-Chairs of the APC will be faculty members. Another member of the APC may be delegated the role of Co-Chair if the appointed Co-Chairs are unable to participate in a particular case.
Normally, one Co-Chair will act as Chair of a Hearing Panel. The Co-Chair will:
- appoint a Hearing Panel;
- serve as the Chair of a Hearing Panel, unless that role is delegated as above;
- convene hearings;
- preside over hearings of the MBA/MOM APC Panel according to the Rules of Procedure[1] and give procedural direction for the conduct of individual cases to the extent that a procedural issue is not dealt with in the Rules of Procedure;
- participate in the Hearing Panel deliberations and decision-making;
- guide the APC in the uniform and consistent application of the regulations and relevant policies within and across the MBA/MOM/GD programs;
- ensure hearings are conducted fairly and with due process; and
- draft and finalize the decision of the Hearing Panel consistent with the findings and reasons of the APC members and communicate the Panel’s Decision to the parties involved.
[1] See the MBA/MOM APC Rules of Procedure for the rules regarding pre-hearing, hearing, and post-hearing matters.
5.3.2 The Academic Progress Committee Rules of Procedure
Smith School of Business
Master of Business Administration, Master of Management, and Graduate Diploma Programs Academic Progress Committee
Adopted by Faculty Board September 12, 2017
Rules of Procedure
The following Rules of Procedure apply to the General Proceedings, Appeal Hearings (“Hearings”), Decisions, Post-Hearing and Record-Keeping matters of the Master of Business Administration, Master of Management and Graduate Diploma Academic Progress Committee (“MBA/MOM APC”).
These Rules of Procedure shall be interpreted liberally to facilitate the just, expeditious and cost-effective determination of every proceeding on its merits.
The Terms of Reference for the MBA/MOM Academic Program Committee are available in a separate document.
1 - General Rules
The following rules of apply to proceedings before an APC Hearing Panel (“Panel”):
1.1 - Panel Decisions Will Be Made In Accordance With Relevant School Regulations And Procedures
The Panel will adhere to the relevant program Academic Regulations as well as policies and procedures of the School and Queen’s University.
1.2 - All appeals are to be heard by the Panel in camera
To protect the privacy and confidentiality of students, Panel meetings and Hearings are closed to the public.
Hearings are not normally recorded, unless a special request is made by the appellant in advance of the Hearing. In such a case, the Chair of the Panel (“Chair”) will decide whether to record the Hearing. The Chair may also wish to record a Hearing, and will inform the parties of the intention to do so in advance of the Hearing. Any transcripts of a Hearing will be provided to either party upon request, in which case a copy will also be provided to the other party. Transcripts must be treated as confidential. There will be no recording of the Panel’s deliberations. Participants may take their own notes during the Hearing. All such notes are transitory1 and are not considered to be University Records.
In cases where an APC member has, or may be reasonably perceived to have, a conflict of interest with respect to a specific case, that individual may not serve on the APC Panel in connection with that case2.
No member will participate in the deliberations or final Decision of the Panel unless present for the entire Appeal Hearing.
1.5 - Supplementary Rules Of Procedure
As needed, the Chair has the power to issue such supplementary rules of procedure as may be necessary to govern the conduct of an Appeal.
1.6 - The Panel Has No Power To Compel Any Person To Attend A Hearing
The Chair may request the participation of parties and witnesses, but it has no power to compel participation.
2 - Appeal Hearing
A student wishing to appeal an academic decision made at the Program level has a right to a Hearing before an APC Hearing Panel. In such a case, the student has seven (7) days following the date of the Program’s decision to provide the APC Co-Chair with written confirmation that they wish to appeal the Program’s decision (“Notice of Appeal”).
2.1 - Written Submissions
After indicating their intention to appeal, the student will have a further 14 days following the date on their Notice of Appeal to provide the APC Co-Chair with a full written Submission.
i. The Student’s Submission: The student’s Submission should outline their situation, include any and all pertinent evidence, a list of any witnesses the student intends to bring to the Appeal Hearing, and the student’s desired remedy for the situation.
ii. The Director’s Submission: The Co-Chair of the APC will share the Student’s Submission with the Program Director, who will have seven (7) days following receipt of the Student’s Submission to respond with their own written Submission if they wish. The Program Director’s Submission should include the reasons for their decision, any pertinent evidence, and a list of any witnesses they intend to bring to the Appeal Hearing.
iii. The Student’s Response: The Program Director’s Submission will be shared with the student who will have seven (7) days following receipt of the Director’s Submission to submit a final written Statement to the APC Co-Chair if they wish.
2.2 - The Proceeding
Following the receipt of all written Submissions, the Co-Chair shall appoint the members of the Hearing Panel[1] and schedule the Appeal Hearing. The student shall be given sufficient notice of the date, time and location of the Hearing, as well as the names of all participants, and their role, in at the Hearing. The Hearing will be conducted in an appropriate space.
- The student has the right to appear in-person, electronically, or to opt not to appear at the Hearing.
- A Hearing may proceed and a decision made without additional input from the student in cases where the student opts not to appear at their Hearing.
- The student has the right to representation, including an Ombuds Academic Appeal Advisor University from the Office of the University Ombudsperson and/or legal counsel and/or other agent (all at the student’s own expense) at the Appeal Hearing. The student may make oral submissions, or their representative may make submissions on their behalf. The student must inform the Chair of the name and role of any representatives in advance of the Hearing.
- Normally the Program Director or their delegate will attend the Hearing and make oral submissions. The Program Director may also bring representation who may make submissions on their behalf.
- Other witnesses will be asked to participate in the Hearing as deemed necessary by the Chair. Witnesses are individuals who have first-hand knowledge of the matters at issue in the Appeal Hearing; the evidence of ‘character’ witnesses will not normally be received by the Panel. Each party shall have an opportunity to question witnesses. The Chair can limit questioning of a witness if the Chair believes the questioning is irrelevant, abusive or otherwise inappropriate.
- The Chair shall determine what evidence is admitted as part of the Hearing. The Chair shall normally apply a relevance approach[2] to such determinations. The Chair has the right to exclude evidence that is deemed irrelevant, repetitive or otherwise inappropriate.
- If, during the course of the Hearing, the Chair decides that more information is required in order to clarify a matter, the Chair may adjourn the Hearing to permit the relevant parties to bring forward such information or facts or to permit the Panel to obtain such information.
- The Chair may decide to adjourn the Hearing at the request of a party if the Chair believes that a party may be unfairly prejudiced should the Hearing proceed.
- The Panel has the right to seek confirmation and/or verification of any evidence, claims, or submissions made by any participants in the Hearing; should it be determined that false information was provided to the Panel, the matter may be investigated under the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy.
3 - The Decision
After hearing all the evidence, the Panel shall deliberate in camera. The deliberations of the Panel are confidential.
Following deliberations, the Panel may:
- Dismiss the Appeal and uphold the original decision of the Program. In the case that the student be required to withdraw, a formal letter advising the student of the requirement to withdraw will be issued; or,
- Allow the Appeal and grant the remedy requested by the Student; or,
- Allow the Appeal in part and modify the Program’s original decision, and impose an appropriate sanction. This may include:
- Imposing specific conditions under which the student will be permitted to continue in the Program and/or any requirements the student must meet, including the timelines within which such conditions and/or requirements must be met;
- Requiring the student to:
- complete additional work;
- repeat an exam, paper, or course;
- achieve a minimum grade(s);
- provide evidence of fitness to continue in the Program;
- Placing the student on Academic Probation until the student satisfies all conditions and/or requirements within the timeline(s) set by the Panel.
- Impose other terms and/or conditions as may appropriate for the specific situation.
The Panel may not award financial compensation to a student.
The Panel’s Decision shall be communicated to the student within seven (7) days, or within a reasonable time as demanded by the complexity of the case, via a Decision Letter from the Panel Chair. The Decision Letter will include the reasons for the Decision, information about the next level of appeal, to whom to address an appeal, and information about the availability of the support of the Office of the University Ombudsperson.
The Panel’s Decision Letter shall be the official record of the Appeal. The Decision Letter will include the effective date of any actions to be taken by the Program (see Section 4).
4 - Post-Proceeding Matters
In accordance with the Senate Student Academic Appeal Policy, Section 34, the student is normally entitled to exhaust all levels of appeal before sanctions are applied, except in the rare case where an academic unit determines that the interests of third parties may be prejudiced by the continued enrolment of a student in a course or program. In such a case, the Panel will determine if the student may continue in their Program until appeal processes are exhausted, and under what conditions the student may do so, having regard for the need to protect the interests of the third party/parties. The Panel shall address the effective date of any actions and/or sanctions in the Decision Letter.
5 - Records Management And Privacy
Queen’s University is subject to provincial access and privacy legislation with regard to the information it holds about the University and the individuals who participate in the Queen’s community. Specifically, the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) and the Personal Health Information Protection Act (PHIPA) apply to various aspects of the University’s operations. To the extent that the University has operations in the European Union, it is subject to the EU General Data Protection Regulation.
Appeal Records consist of all documents filed by the parties, the recording, if any, of the Appeal Hearing(s), the transcript, if any, of the recording, and the Decision Letter issued by the Panel.
5.1 - Responsibilities of the Co-Chair
The APC Co-Chair or delegate is responsible for collecting and distributing Appeal Records. The Co-Chair shall handle such records in a secure manner which protects the confidentiality of the documents.
Following an Appeal Hearing and issuance of the Decision Letter, the Panel Chair shall collect the files and any notes made during the Hearing by Panel members. All such notes are transitory and are not considered to be University Records. They form no part of the Appeal Record and shall be destroyed immediately following the issuance of the Panel’s Decision.
5.2 - Records Retention Schedule
Once the Panel renders its decision:
- The Decision Letter is the official record of the Decision, a copy of which shall be kept by the APC Co-Chair, the Program Director and in the Dean’s Office.
- Original Appeal Records are to be kept by the APC Co-Chair for one (1) year following the date on which the student has exhausted all levels of appeal at the University, or, for one (1) year following the expiry of the deadline for the student to pursue an appeal, whichever occurs first.
- Transitory records may be destroyed
- Duplicated records will be destroyed
Appeals of these decisions are made to the Academic Appeals Committee.
5.3 - Appeals of Academic Integrity Decisions
Course professors will normally investigate and make decisions regarding possible violations of academic integrity in their courses in accordance with the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy and as set out in Section 5.1.
Appeals of professors’ decisions regarding academic integrity are made to the Academic Integrity Panel.
In cases where the Academic Integrity Panel is the initial decision maker, appeals are made to the Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee.
5.4 - The Smith School Of Business Academic Appeals Committee
The Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) has jurisdiction over all matters related to academic appeals involving students registered in the School of Business (with the exception of the PhD and Master of Science programs). The AAC hears appeals of decisions made by Academic Progress Committee and the Academic Integrity Panel.
Normally, the AAC serves as a true appeal board, which is not empowered to substitute its own decision for that of the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel, but rather reviews the decision of the previous decision-making body based on the same information[1] available to the previous body at the time the decision was made.[2]
The AAC reviews the circumstances of the decision of the previous decision-maker to: ensure that the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel did not exceed its jurisdiction; ensure that there was procedural fairness; ensure that there was appropriate consideration of extenuating circumstances; uphold the academic policies and principles reflected in the School’s and University’s regulations; and determine if the decision was reasonable.
In rendering a decision, the AAC may uphold the decision of the previous body, grant the student's appeal, or modify the original decision/sanction. Any decision made by the AAC must be within the scope of the School’s regulations.
Appeals of decisions made by the AAC are made to the University Student Appeal Board.
5.5 - The University Student Appeal Board
Where an appeal to the University Student Appeal Board (“USAB”) is permitted, after exhausting all internal appeals within their faculty or School, a student may appeal to USAB within two weeks after the date of the Faculty’s or School’s last decision. See the Student Academic Appeals Policy (“SAAP”) for the full mandate and processes of USAB. Faculties and Schools are bound by and must implement all decisions of USAB. The University Student Appeal Board is the final internal appeal body at Queen’s University.
The University Student Appeal Board (USAB) has jurisdiction to hear the following types of appeals by students from the final academic decision-making body within their Faculty or School:
USAB has the jurisdiction to review a decision if it results in the application of an academic regulation that impedes a student’s academic standing in a program, but USAB does not have the jurisdiction to review the academic regulation itself; a decision concerning a departure from academic integrity and
step-two decisions made by a Unit Head concerning an employment-related issue between an undergraduate teaching assistant and their course supervisor.
The Provost and Vice-Principal (Academic) (“Provost”) or their designate may, refer any decision involving a departure from academic integrity directly to a proceeding before USAB if they are satisfied that an internal appeal of the decision cannot be made in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness; and the matter has not been appealed to another body.
USAB will have full jurisdiction to impose any sanction that could have been made by a body with original jurisdiction over the matter, including requiring the student to withdraw. The provost (or their designate) will be present at the USAB proceeding and will determine what sanction to seek from USAB. USAB have no jurisdiction to consider the academic substance of decisions and assessments.
The grounds for an appeal to USAB are limited to cases in which a student can establish that:
- The decision-making body whose decision is being appealed failed to act in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as 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 affected 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 be upheld if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes, in which case USAB is not permitted to substitute its opinion for that of the decision-maker whose decision is under appeal.
- The decision-maker whose decision is being appealed to USAB acted without, or exceeded its, jurisdiction.
No Costs Reimbursement
Neither USAB nor any other decision-maker in the University has the power to direct that a student receive compensation for any costs or expenses incurred during any University-based proceeding. Notwithstanding this, USAB may order that a student receive reimbursement for loss of a Queen’s University bursary, scholarship, or similar funds because of a decision that was reversed on appeal. This remedy is available only if the student remains a student following the issuance of USAB’s decision, or, if the student graduated while their appeal was pending.
Decisions of USAB
In deciding an appeal, USAB may do one of the following:
i. Remit a matter for reconsideration by the decision-maker whose decision has been appealed to USAB, with directions or recommendations; a reconsideration decision may be appealed to USAB based on one of the Grounds for Appeal stated above.
ii. Modify the original decision, including making any decision that the original decision-maker could have made, but only where:
a. Proceeding in accordance with Section 48(i) of the Rules of Procedures for USAB would cause delay that prejudices the student’s rights; or,
b. USAB has made a finding of bias in the decision-making process below.
The decision of the USAB is final, and there is no further level of appeal.
5.6 - Appeals At Partner Institutions
Appeals of academic decisions at partner, exchange and double degree institutions are subject to the policies and procedures at those universities. Students should note that Queen’s has no jurisdiction, or ability to influence, partner exchange or double degree universities in these matters.
1 See the Queen’s University Policy on Transitory Records: Transitory Records are created or received by the University in the course of conducting its activities, but have no ongoing operational, informational, evidential or historical value. Usually transitory records have an immediate or short-term value, pertaining to an immediate task or minor transaction. They can exist in any format or medium. An example is an e-mail confirming attendance at a meeting.
2 Normally, having taught the appellant in a class that is neither directly the subject of the appeal nor indirectly the subject of the appeal is not considered a conflict of interest and does not require that the APC member recuse themselves. A conflict of interest may be present if: there is a relationship between the APC member and the student (such as a consulting or family relationship); the APC member has an interest in the outcome of the decision; the APC member has pre-judged the case; the APC member was involved in an earlier stage of decision-making.
In cases where a conflict is unclear, the remaining members of the APC will determine if the member should be recused.
Note that in complex cases, additional time may be required. The Co-Chair has the power to make exceptions to the stated timeframes as appropriate based on the complexity of the case. Parties must make requests for additional time to the Co-Chair as soon as they determine the need for additional time.
[1] Hearing Panels shall normally consist of a minimum of three APC members and a maximum of all APC members based on availability and any conflict of interest issues.
[2] A relevance approach provides that evidence should be accepted if it is deemed to be relevant to the matter before the Panel.
[1] In situations where new evidence becomes available which may have, or is likely to have, affected the original decision of the previous decision-maker (i.e. the APC or the AIP), the AAC will refer those cases back to the previous decision-maker.
[2] Where the Academic Integrity Panel (AIP) was the initial decision-maker, the AAC will investigate an Academic Integrity case de novo.
5.4 Appeals of Academic Integrity Decisions
Course professors will normally investigate and make decisions regarding possible violations of academic integrity in their courses in accordance with the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy and as set out in Section 4.1.
Appeals of professors’ decisions regarding academic integrity are made to the Academic Integrity Panel.
In cases where the Academic Integrity Panel is the initial decision maker, appeals are made to the Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee.
5.5 The Academic Progress Committee
The Smith School of Business Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) has jurisdiction over all matters related to academic appeals involving students registered in the School of Business (with the exception of the PhD and Master of Science programs). The AAC hears appeals of decisions made by Academic Progress Committee and the Academic Integrity Panel.
Normally, the AAC serves as a true appeal board, which is not empowered to substitute its own decision for that of the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel, but rather reviews the decision of the previous decision-making body based on the same information[1] available to the previous body at the time the decision was made.[2]
The AAC reviews the circumstances of the decision of the previous decision-maker to: ensure that the Academic Progress Committee or the Academic Integrity Panel did not exceed its jurisdiction; ensure that there was procedural fairness; ensure that there was appropriate consideration of extenuating circumstances; uphold the academic policies and principles reflected in the School’s and University’s regulations; and determine if the decision was reasonable.
In rendering a decision, the AAC may uphold the decision of the previous body, grant the student's appeal, or modify the original decision/sanction. Any decision made by the AAC must be within the scope of the School’s regulations.
Appeals of decisions made by the AAC are made to the University Student Appeal Board.
[1] In situations where new evidence becomes available which may have, or is likely to have, affected the original decision of the previous decision-maker (i.e. the APC or the AIP), the AAC will refer those cases back to the previous decision-maker.
[2] Where the Academic Integrity Panel (AIP) was the initial decision-maker, the AAC will investigate an Academic Integrity case de novo.
For the APC Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure, please see Appendices A&B.
5.6 The University Student Appeal Board
Where an appeal to the University Student Appeal Board (“USAB”) is permitted, after exhausting all internal appeals within their faculty or School, a student may appeal to USAB within two weeks after the date of the Faculty’s or School’s last decision. See the Student Academic Appeals Policy (“SAAP”) for the full mandate and processes of USAB. Faculties and Schools are bound by and must implement all decisions of USAB. The University Student Appeal Board is the final internal appeal body at Queen’s University. The decision of the USAB is final, and there is no further level of appeal.
The University Student Appeal Board (USAB) has jurisdiction to hear the following types of appeals by students from the final academic decision-making body within their Faculty or School:
USAB has the jurisdiction to review a decision if it results in the application of an academic regulation that impedes a student’s academic standing in a program, but USAB does not have the jurisdiction to review the academic regulation itself; a decision concerning a departure from academic integrity and step-two decisions made by a Unit Head concerning an employment-related issue between an undergraduate teaching assistant and their course supervisor.
The Provost and Vice-Principal (Academic) (“Provost”) or their designate may, refer any decision involving a departure from academic integrity directly to a proceeding before USAB if they are satisfied that an internal appeal of the decision cannot be made in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness; and the matter has not been appealed to another body.
USAB will have full jurisdiction to impose any sanction that could have been made by a body with original jurisdiction over the matter, including requiring the student to withdraw. The Provost (or their designate) will be present at the USAB proceeding and will determine what sanction to seek from USAB. USAB have no jurisdiction to consider the academic substance of decisions and assessments.
The grounds for an appeal to USAB are limited to cases in which a student is able to establish that:
- The decision-making body whose decision is being appealed failed to act in accordance with the rules of procedural fairness. A breach of procedural fairness includes such things as 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 affected 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 be upheld if it falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes, in which case USAB is not permitted to substitute its opinion for that of the decision-maker whose decision is under appeal.
2. The decision-maker whose decision is being appealed to USAB acted without, or exceeded its, jurisdiction.
5.7 Appeals at Partner Institutions
Appeals of academic decisions at partner, exchange and double degree institutions are subject to the policies and procedures at those universities. Students should note that Queen’s has no jurisdiction, or ability to influence, partner exchange or double degree universities in these matters.
6: STUDENT SERVICES
6.1 Educational Equity
Through the Educational Equity Policy, Queen's University recognizes that the values of equity and diversity are vital to and in harmony with its educational mission and standards of excellence. It acknowledges that direct, indirect and systemic discrimination exist within our institutional structures, policies and practices and in our community. These take many forms and work to differentially advantage and disadvantage persons across social identities such as race, ethnicity, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith and socioeconomic status, among other examples.
Queen's is committed to counteracting discrimination in this institution and developing a climate of educational equity that recognizes and respects the equal dignity and worth of all who seek to participate in the life, work and mission of the University. Such a climate is created and maintained by developing a university-wide commitment to and understanding of educational equity, supported by policies, programs, curricula, practices and traditions that facilitate individuals - and equity-seeking groups- free, safe, and full participation.
Any student who has concerns related to educational equity may contact the Program Director, the Office of the University Ombudsperson, and/or the Human Rights and Equity Services.
6.2 Accommodation for Special Needs/Disabilities
Queen’s Policy Concerning Students with Disabilities states:
Queen's University is committed to facilitating the integration of students with disabilities into the University community. While all students must satisfy the essential requirements for courses and programs, the administration, faculty, staff, and students at Queen's are expected to provide reasonable accommodation to students with disabilities. Reasonable accommodation may require members of the University community to exercise creativity and flexibility in responding to the needs of students with disabilities while maintaining academic standards.
This policy acknowledges that fundamental to the academic and personal success of students is their responsibility both to demonstrate self-reliance and to identify needs requiring accommodation.
It is the responsibility of students in need of accommodation for a disability or other special need to contact Queen’s Student Accessibility Services to register for formal accommodations. In partnership with Student Accessibility Services, the Program will work to ensure that appropriate modifications or accommodations are made in accordance with Queen’s Policy on Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities and Queen’s Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Procedure.
6.3 Academic Advising
Students should contact the Program administration with questions about degree requirements, electives or other academic matters as appropriate.
6.4 Personal Counselling
Queen’s University provides personal counselling services through Student Wellness Services. Student Wellness Services supports the personal, academic, and social development of students at Queen's University by providing a range of programs and services.
Students may also contact the Program Director to discuss supports available through Smith School of Business.
6.5 The University Ombudsperson
Queen’s University is committed to the just, fair and equitable treatment of each and every member of the University community. In keeping with this commitment, the Office of the University Ombudsperson provides an independent, impartial and confidential office through which members of the University community may pursue the just, fair and equitable resolution of university-related concerns within its jurisdiction.
Among other duties, the Office of the University Ombudsperson: receives, assesses, and facilitates the informal resolution of concerns and complaints; provides confidential and independent advice and support to members of the University community; acts as a liaison between individuals and/or groups at all levels serving as a communicator or informal conciliator; and mediates the resolution of complaints.
Any student who finds themselves in an appeal situation is strongly advised to contact the Office of the University Ombudsperson for advice, assistance and support. In appropriate circumstances and subject to availability, the Office of the University Ombudsperson can assign an Ombuds Academic Appeal Advisor to assist a student who is facing serious adverse academic consequences. The role of an Ombuds Academic Appeal Advisor is to ensure that students are aware of their rights and responsibilities and to counsel students about opportunities to resolve their matter.
7: ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES
7.1 The Faculty Board of Smith School of Business
In May 1963, the Faculty Board of Smith School of Business was established by the Board of Trustees of the University on the Senate's recommendation, to provide an appropriate body for the regulation of the conduct of the School's academic programs.
The Faculty Board of Smith School of Business (SSB) is constituted as follows: the Principal (ex officio), the Dean and Associate Dean(s) of Smith School of Business, all regular faculty of SSB, all adjunct academic staff of SSB, all other persons, who are currently teaching or whose appointment is in force at the date of the meeting or those in other faculties giving required courses for any of the degree programs in SSB; one senior administrative officer from each of the major teaching programs (eg., BCom, Queen's MBA, Exec MBA, AMBA, Exec MBA Americas, Master of Management, MSc/PhD); a representative of all non-academic, non-teaching staff of Smith School of Business (to be elected by this group); President of the Commerce Society, two BCom student Senators, two other representatives from the Commerce Society, one student representative from the Queen's MBA program, one student representative from the Executive MBA Programs, one representative from the AMBA Program, one representative from the Exec MBA Americas Program, one student representative from the Master of Management Programs, one representative from the MSc Program, one from the PhD Program.
7.2 Review of Record by Faculty Board
The Faculty Board of the School of Business reserves the right to review the record of any student. The Faculty Board will recommend to the Senate the granting of the Degree, after all courses have been completed in accordance with the provisions specified in this Calendar.
7.3 Student Names
As the University is committed to the integrity of its student records, each student is required to provide either on application for admission or on personal data forms required for registration, their complete, legal name. Any requests to change a name, by means of alteration, deletion, substitution or addition must be accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation in accordance with the University Policy on Student Names.
7.4 Confidentiality
The Program acknowledges that confidentiality is a serious and important issue for students. Students may be submitting and developing confidential business plans and strategies, and these submissions are carefully protected. All staff sign confidentiality agreements. These confidentiality agreements are kept on file in the Program office, and students may request a copy at any time.
Class discussions will frequently include company-specific examples. In order to encourage open class discussions, all in-class discussions should be held in the strictest confidence by students and professors, and must not be discussed outside of class. Recorded classes are for the purpose of helping students in their studies and must not be copied, shared or distributed in any way.
7.5 Conflict of Interest
Fairness or objectivity may be compromised if academic evaluation is conducted, even in part, by someone to whom there is a close personal or professional tie (for example, a family member or consulting relationship). Where such a tie does exist between student and instructor, the parties involved have the responsibility to declare a potential conflict of interest, normally to the Program Director who will assist, without prejudice, in arranging evaluation by alternative means.
Conflicts of interest may also arise with the sharing of confidential company information on projects, as well as within teams. When this occurs, the parties involved must declare the potential conflict to the Program Director who will make, without prejudice, alternative arrangements.
7.6 Withdrawal and Re-Admission
A student who withdraws from the Program, whether voluntarily or as a result of a requirement to withdraw, is subsequently no longer considered to be an enrolled student of Queen's University. There is no opportunity for students to take a leave of absence from the Program, except in extraordinary circumstances.
Following withdrawal from the Program, former students may apply for re-admission. It is important to note that prior admission to the Program is not a guarantee of future re-admission. To initiate an application for re-admission, former students must submit all documents and materials required by the admissions procedures in place at the time of their application for re-admission.
In some cases a student who has withdrawn will be re-admitted on Academic Probation. Students who withdraw while on Academic Probation will continue on Probation if they are re-admitted to the Program. Students who have been required to withdraw from the Program will not normally be re-admitted to the Program.
Depending on the date of withdrawal and the fees already paid, a participant who withdraws from the Program may be eligible for a refund of fees as follows:
Program fees are due in full for all completed courses.
For partially completed courses, 50% of the course fee is due up to and including half-way point of the course. After the half-way point of the course, the fee will be prorated based on the length of time the participant is enrolled in the course.
The fee for the projects will be prorated based on the credits earned in non-project courses by the participant at the time of withdrawal.
There will be no refund of in-residence fees incurred.
There will be no refund of advisor fees incurred for individual projects.
The amount allocated for the Global Business Project travel is non-refundable in the event that a participant leaves the program.
For refund calculation purposes the fee per course credit is calculated by the Finance Office. The refund per course is adjusted according to the credit weight of the particular course taken.
Students with Queen’s or Smith scholarships will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
8: FINANCIAL POLICY
Students should consult the Program website or Director for the fee schedule and late payment policies.
8.1 Outstanding Debts
Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Debtors provides that:
Any student with an overdue debt with the University will not be permitted to register or receive examination results, official transcripts or marks reports until the outstanding account is settled in full or until an acceptable arrangement for settling the account is made. In no case will a diploma be released to a student with an outstanding debt with the University.
Students with outstanding debts may also be restricted from registering for, or attending, courses and residential sessions until all debts have been paid in full or an acceptable arrangement for the payment of debt has been reached.
Interest will be charged to the student account on any overdue amount. Interest is calculated on a compound basis. Account queries should be addressed to the Smith Finance Office.
8.2 Trademark and Copyright
Smith School of Business is the owner of its trademarks (logo, name, colours) and custom materials (workbooks, study guides, cases). Smith School of Business retains ownership of all trademarks and copyrights, and students may not duplicate or reproduce these trademarks and copyrights without specific written permission from the Dean of Smith School of Business and the Program Director. This is particularly important regarding the use of the logo, which may not be reproduced on clothing or other materials without the prior written consent of the Dean and the Program Director. The School assumes no responsibility for any costs incurred by students who proceed to use the School logo without receiving prior written permission. Persons who use the School trademark and copyrights withou