-
1.1.1 that there existed circumstances affecting the candidate's
performance of which the examiners (or the assessors,
-
in the case of an upgrade) had not been made aware when their decision
was taken;
-
1.1.2 that there were procedural irregularies in the conduct of the
examination, or that the upgrading meeting (including
-
administrative error), of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt whether
the result might have been different had they not occured;
-
1.1.3 that there was evidence of prejudice or of bias or of inadequate
assessment on the part of one or more of the
-
examiners (or the assessors, in the case of an upgrade);
-
1.1.4 that the supervision of the candidate was unsatisfactory to
the point that his/her performance was seriously
-
affected;
-
1.1.5 that in reaching their decision the examiners (or the assessors,
in the case of an upgrade) had erroneously
-
concluded that the candidate had cheated or plagiarised or attempted to
gain an unfair advantage in the thesis or in any element of work submitted
for the degree.
-
1.2.1 A candidate who wishes to appeal against the termination of
course on the grounds of unsatisfactory progress, prior to
-
the meeting of the examiners, shall be treated under the terms of the Regulations
governing Reviews and Appeals by Students on Taught Courses.
-
1.2.2 A candidate registered on a postgraduate research course who
wishes to appeal against any decision of a Board of
Examiners that relates to any circumstances other than the thesis
(for example, the outcome of a taught course, practical examination or
clinical placement) shall be treated under the terms of the Regulations
governing Appeals by Students on Taught Courses.
1.3 An appeal may only be lodged by a student;
it may not be lodged by a representative or by a parent.
2.1 Candidates wishing to exercise their right
of appeal shall give written notice to the Academic Registrar, normally
within 21
days from the date when the examiners' or assessors' decision was formally
communicated to them.
2.2 The written notice should include the
grounds on which an appeal is being made; the desired outcome of the appeal;
the
identify, if known, of any person accompanying the appellant (see 4.3,
below); and a summary of evidence adduced in support of the appeal.
Any appeal citing medical factors must be supported by appropriate certificates.
2.3 After the appeal has been lodged, the
Chair of the committee may, following discussion with at least one other
member
of the Committee, rule that the appeal is groundless and should be
dismissed. In this case, the Secretary of the Committee will send
a full written explanation to the appellant, normally within 21 days of
the appeal having been lodged.
2.4 If the Chair of the Committee judges
that the appellant has provided sufficient grounds for the appeal to be
entertained,
the Secretary will send a copy of the appellant's statement to the
Dean of the Faculty, Head(s) of Department(s)/School(s) and supervisor(s),
asking if it contains information not known to the Faculty Board.
In the light of the information in the appellant's statement, the Dean
of the Faculty, acting on behalf of the Faculty Board, may agree to change
the Board's decision, in which case the appeal succeeds without a hearing.
3.1 The Research Degree Appeals Committee shall
consist of:
The Vice-Chancellor or a Deputy Vice-Chancellor in the Chair;
The Dean of a Faculty other than that concerned;
A member of the academic staff who is from a faculty other than that
concerned;
A postgraduate student who is from a faculty other than that concerned
appointed by the Students' Union President;
An external member, nominated by the Vice-Chancellor, who shall normally
be a member of the academic staff of another institution with substantial
experience of supervising candidates for higher degrees in the relevant
subject area.
The Academic Registrar, or representative, shall act as Secretary to
the Committee.
3.2 None of the members of the Committee
may have had any previous connection with the candidate or other involvement
which may be felt to prejudice their fair opinion. In the event
of any disagreement about the suitability of any member of the Committee,
the decision of the Chair shall be final.
4. The Secretary shall convene
a meeting of the Committee normally within two months of receipt of the
candidate's written
notice of appeal, enclosing a copy of the appellant's letter and any
supporting evidence. The Secretary shall notify the appellant in
writing:
4.1 of the date, time and place of the meeting;
4.2 of the names of those constituting the
Committe;
4.3 that the appellant is entitled either to
attend in person, alone or accompanied by his/her supervisor(s) or by any
other member of the University willing to assist in this way, or by
a legally qualified person; or to be represented in his/her absence by
such a person; and that it is in the appellant's own interests to be so
accompanied or represented.
4.4 that the Committee reserves the right to take
legal advice on its own behalf and, if the appellant elects to be
accompanied or represented by a legally qualified person, it may also
invite its legal adviser to be present at the hearing.
5. Not less than seven days
before the hearing the Dean of the Faculty shall supply the Secretary with
copies of the
examiners' (or assessors', in the case of an upgrade) reports and a
written statement of any other facts which in the Faculty's view should
be taken into account. The Secretary shall send, under confidential
cover, copies of the examiners' (or assessors') reports and of the Faculty
statement to the Committee, to the Head(s) of the Department(s)/School(s)
and to the appellant's supervisor(s). Two copies of each shall be
sent to the appellant.
6. The Dean of the Faculty or
the Dean's representative shall attend the hearing of the appeal.
Head(s) of the
Department(s)/School(s) concerned or their representatives shall be
entitles to attend the hearing. The hearing shall be in private and
any other witnesses who may be called shall not be present except while
testifying.
7. The appellant's supervisor(s)
shall be notified by the Secretary of the time and place of the hearing.
If not accompanying
or representing the appellant, the supervisor(s) should be available
and may be called as a witness by the appellant or by the Faculty.
8. At the hearing the Committee
shall first hear any representations made and evidence called by or on
behalf of the
appellant, and then any further representations made and evidence called
on behalf of the Faculty. The Dean or Head of Department on behalf
of the Faculty shall be entitled to question any person testifying on behalf
of the appellant, and the appellant or appellant's representative shall
be entitled to question any person testifying on behalf of the Faculty.
The Committee may also question any of the parties.
9. The Dean or Head of Department
or their representative, followed by the appellant or his/her representative,
shall be
entitled to make a short final speech summarising their submission.
10. All those present other than the members
of the Committee, its legal adviser (where appointed, and where continuing
legal advice is required) and its Secretary shall then withdraw and
the Committee shall consider its decision. this decision shall be
arrived at on the basis of the previous testimony and submissions; if any
new considerations emerge during the Committee's deliberations which the
Committee considers to be relevant those who have withdrawn shall be recalled,
told what these considerations are and given an opportunity of commenting
on or refuting them.
11. The Committee may invite the parties
to return to the hearing and shall then announce its decision, to be confirmed
in
writing immediately afterwards; or shall announce its decision in writing
as soon as possible after the hearing. the Secretary shall notify
all concerned of the result of the appeal; shall prepare a full record
of the hearing; and shall prepare a report for Senate, which shall include
the reason for the Committee's decision.
12. The Appeals Committee acts on behalf of Senate
and may take one of the following courses of action:
12.1 the Committee may dismiss the appeal;
12.2 when the appeal is on either of the grounds
stated in 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 above, the Committee may:
12.2.1 either request the original board of examiners,
via the Faculty Board concerned, to amend
its recommendation;
12.2.2 or give the candidate permission to revise the thesis
and re-submit it for re-examination within a
specified time;
12.2.3 or declare the examination null and void and direct
that a fresh examination be conducted.
-
12.3 where the appeal is on the grounds stated in 1.1.3
or 1.1.5 above, the Committee may direct that the thesis shall
be re-examined;
12.4 where the appeal is on the grounds stated at 1.1.4 above,
the Committee may give the candidate permission to
revise the thesis and re-submit for re-examination within a specified
time. In this case, the Committee will state whether or not a further
period of full-time or part-time supervised study is required; and will
instruct the department or faculty to ensure that satisfactory supervisory
arrangements are made for the period until resubmission.
12.5 where the appeal is against a decision not to upgrade
from MPhil to PhD status, the Committee may:
12.5.1 either request the Faculty to amend its decision
and to permit the student to upgrade to PhD status;
12.5.2 or request, through the Faculty, that the
School or Department inform the student what additional work
is necessary for an upgrade to PhD status, and by
what date this material should be submitted to the
original assessment panel;
12.5.3 or request, through the Faculty, that the School
or Department reassesses the student within six weeks
of the meeting of the Appeals Committee, and that
the Head of Department/Schoold, or his/her nominee,
and one other member of academic staff in
the School or Department or an external examiner be added
to the original assessment panel. (In these
circumstances, it is recommended that the Head of
Department/School should discuss the composition
of the new panel with the Dean of the Faculty.)
13. Where the decision of the Committee is for re-examination
under clauses 12.2.2, 12.2.3, 12.3 or 12.4 above, the following procedure shall apply:
13.1 The Faculty Board shall appoint new examiners, no
fewer in number than on the original board and including at
least two external examiners;
13.2 The external examiners shall be given no information about
the previous examination other than that they are
conducting a re-examination on appeal and are required to hold an oral
examination;
13.3 the examiners shall report on the thesis independently
before they examine the candidate orally, and shall make a
joint report after the oral examination.
13.4 The reports of the members of the original board of examiners
and of the new board shall be sent to the Faculty
Board; where the recommendations of the two boards do not agree, any
agreed recommendation of the new board will normally be expected to prevail;
13.5 The Committee will normally make a recommendation to the
Faculty about whether or not the candidate shall
be liable for any fees in respect of any further period of registration
required before re-examination.
The outcome of the re-examination shall be publised in the normal way.
14. The decision of the Appeals Committee
is final, subject only to the previsions of Section 17.20 of the Statutes
of
the University.
15. In its Report to Senate of the outcome
of the appeal the Committee may, if it sees fit, also make recommendations
of a more general nature on issues that arise from the hearing.
The Department(s) and/or Faculty concerned shall be given the opportunity
to comment upon any recommendations that concern them.
16. All those present at the hearing shall
at all times treat any evidence given at the hearing as confidential.
17. One copy of all the papers presented to
the Committee will be retained by the Secretary for a period of twenty-four
months following the date of the hearing.
18. These regulations describe in detail
the procedures to be followed in the event of an appeal being lodged by
a
postgraduate research student at the University of Southampton.
Procedures in the Accredited Colleges will follow the spirit of these regulations
but may differ in their detailed application as a consequence of the different
academic structures of these institutions.
19. Further information about, or clarification
of these procedures is available from Dr R J Green, Senior Assistant Registrar,
University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ; telephone: 023-80-593062;
fax:593037; e-mail <rjg1@soton.ac.uk>.
20. Students considering lodging a request
for an appeal under the terms of these regulations are strongly advised
to make
early contact with the "Advice and Information Centre" in the Students'
Union.