EXCEPTIONAL PROCEDURES

7.13.1 Review of Decision of Assessment Review Committee (at instigation of Candidate)

a) In exceptional circumstances, a candidate may make written representation, within 10 working days of notification of the decision of the Assessment Review Committee, requesting the Vice-Chancellor to reconvene the Assessment Review Committee for reconsideration of the candidate's application. Applications should be made to the Ombuds Officer in the first instance.

b) Applications can only be made on the following grounds:

i) That the decision reached by the Assessment Review Committee was wholly inconsistent with and/or unsupported by evidence;

ii) That there was a material procedural irregularity by the Assessment Review Committee which has prejudiced the Candidate's case.

or

iii) That additional evidence has come to light since the decision of the Assessment Review Committee, which could not reasonably have been expected to have been produced at the time of the consideration of the application.

c) The decision of the Vice-Chancellor as to whether or not to reconvene the Assessment Review Committee is not subject to further appeal and concludes the Assessment Review Process within the University of Teesside.

d) If the decision of the Vice-Chancellor is not to reconvene the Assessment Review Committee, the candidate shall be issued with a ‘Letter of Completion’ of internal proceedings in the manner prescribed by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA). A candidate who is of the opinion that his/her case is unresolved may apply to the OIA for reconsideration of his/her case under the rules of its scheme within three months of the issue of the ‘Letter of Completion’. Information of the process may be obtained directly from the OIA at http://www.oiahe.org.uk

7.13.2 Review of Decision of Assessment Board (at instigation of a Member).

a) A participant in a meeting of an Assessment Board has the right to request a review by the Academic Board of the Assessment Board's conduct or of a particular decision relating to the outcome of an Application for Assessment Review if he/she believes that the decision of the Assessment Board had been inconsistent and/or unsupported by evidence or that there had been a material procedural irregularity.

b) A request for review by the Academic Board shall be made in writing to the University Secretary (as Secretary of the Academic Board), who shall inform the Vice-Chancellor (as Chair of the Academic Board) and the Chair of the Assessment Review Committee.

c) The Chair of the Assessment Review Committee will consult with the Dean of the relevant School and/or Chair of the University Research Degrees Sub-Committee (or other appropriate authority) as to whether the matter can be resolved prior to consideration by Academic Board, in conformity with the Course

and Assessment Regulations and, where appropriate, the approval of the internal and external examiners. Following such consultation, the Chair of the Assessment Review Committee will report back to the Academic Board. The participant will be informed by the University Secretary of the outcome.

d) Normally, the Academic Board will not consider such requests unless it has become apparent that a complaint cannot be swiftly and satisfactorily resolved informally by the relevant Dean of the relevant School and/or Chair of the University Research Degrees Sub-Committee, Chair of an Assessment Board or other appropriate authority in conformity with the "Framework & Regulations for the Award of Higher Degrees by Research" and with, where appropriate, the approval of internal and external examiners.

e) Where such resolution is unacceptable to the person seeking review, or it is not practicable for the Chair of an Assessment Review Committee, working with the Chair of Assessment Board, to arrange a sufficiently rapid resolution to serve a candidate's interests, a request may be made to the Academic Board by way of the University Secretary. Such a request for Review by the Academic Board will be directed to the Assessment Review Committee in the first instance (and normally, thereafter, unless the circumstances described in Paragraph 7.13.3 applies) unless the Assessment Review Committee has already considered the relevant circumstances. 7.13.3 Review by Academic Board

If an Assessment Board does not, or becomes unable to, act as directed by the Assessment Review Committee, the Committee has the right and duty to so inform the Academic Board. If, after enquiry, the Academic Board finds that an Assessment Board will not, or cannot, conduct itself appropriately in the light of the relevant constitution, terms of reference and current regulations, the Academic Board shall consider and institute any necessary reforms of an Assessment Board and/or any emergency arrangements and procedures necessary to ensure equity for affected candidates. In circumstances where the Assessment Board does not heed the advice of the Academic Board, the Academic Board may annul decisions of that Assessment Board.

7.13.4 Review by Board of Governors

Where an applicant claims that the Academic Board has acted beyond its authority as delegated by the Board of Governors, by operating outside the terms of these regulations or by committing a material administrative irregularity in its consideration of matters

under Paragraph 7.13.3, an application for Final Review may be made to the Board of Governors, via the University Secretary & Registrar. The application will be considered by a Procedure Review Tribunal (consisting of the Chair of the Board, Deputy Chair of the Board, and an independent external assessor of appropriate academic standing). Decisions of this Tribunal are not subject to further appeal.