103.Many students raise issues that do not fall neatly into the category of either complaint or academic appeal, or that need to be handled under a different type of procedure. Sometimes the student will start more than one procedure in relation to the same or similar issues, or the provider itself may decide that the issues need to be handled under more than one procedure. Sometimes a student raises a number of issues at the same time that are not connected. There is no single approach that will work best for all of these cases.
104.The provider will need to make a case-by-case assessment of the best way to handle complex or interconnected cases. The provider should take a flexible approach and vary its normal procedures where reasonable. In deciding which process is most appropriate, or the order in which processes should happen, providers should think about:
- What outcome the student is seeking, and which body within the provider would be able to make a decision on that
- Whether a single process can be used to establish the facts, and used as the basis for decisions under another process. For example, if a student’s complaint about teaching is upheld, an exam board might reconsider their case on the basis of the conclusions reached on the complaint
- If any matters should be prioritised, for example because they are time critical, or because there are concerns about the student’s wellbeing
- How to make it as easy as possible for the student to use more than one process when they need to.
105.The provider should consider meeting with the student at an early stage and shouldn’t overlook opportunities for early resolution or mediation or conciliation just because the case appears to be complex or likely to involve more than one procedure. Taking the time to properly understand the student’s concerns can help the provider to clarify what the key issues are for them and decide on the most appropriate procedure(s) to use to address those concerns.
106.When more than one process is needed, it is important to talk to the student about whether it’s better to use one process after the other (and in what order), to run them at the same time, or to apply the processes more flexibly. Where the provider decides to vary its normal procedure, it should discuss this with the student. It’s important that everyone involved in the process understands what will happen instead and why. It is good practice for the provider to keep records of why it decided to follow a different process. The principles of the Good Practice Framework should still be followed. The provider should explain to the student how the matters will be investigated, who will coordinate the process, and who will issue the final decision.
107.Providers should listen to how students would like their concerns to be taken forward, but the provider must make the final decision about how to proceed.
108.If the issues need to be handled under more than one procedure, where possible the provider should take steps to avoid any unnecessary duplication, such as requiring the student to submit the same evidence multiple times. It is good practice to tell the student which specific issues will be considered under which specific procedure and to direct the student to the appropriate procedure for any remaining issues.
109.It is good practice to tell the student about the implications, if any, of following two procedures, particularly where one procedure may be suspended until the other has finished. It is good practice for the provider to proactively refer the matter to the second process. If the student is expected to take an action to begin the second process, the provider should explain what they must do and say if any deadlines apply. Any secondary process should be completed promptly.
110.The provider should keep the student updated if their case is likely to take longer because more than one process is involved.
111.If a student has concerns about how the provider handled their complaint or appeal, for example a complaint about delay, they shouldn’t normally have to make a separate complaint about those issues. Providers should act flexibly to consider the impact of any delays, or other concerns about the way it dealt with the case, as part of the process. Where it identifies issues with its handling of the case, the provider should offer a remedy for any impact without requiring the student to make a separate complaint about the process. If the student’s concerns aren’t about the process itself, for example they allege that they have been bullied or victimised during the process, the provider will need to consider carefully whether those concerns need to be referred to a separate process to be investigated further.
112.A student may have concerns about another process. For example, they may complain about delays or an unfair process in a disciplinary investigation. In most cases it should be possible to resolve those concerns in that process, for example by apologising for the delay and explaining what is happening with the investigation, or explaining that the student can appeal the disciplinary decision if they believe the process was unfair. But in some cases it may be necessary to consider the student’s concerns under the complaints process.
Case study 9: Deciding which process to use
A student submits an academic appeal on several grounds, one of which is that they have been bullied by their supervisor. The student says this affected their performance in their dissertation. The provider tells the student that it is putting the appeal on hold until the bullying allegation has been investigated under its Harassment and Bullying Procedures, because the outcome of that investigation may be relevant to the student’s appeal. Once that process has been completed, the appeal process can continue.
Case study 10: Acting flexibly to use a single process
A disabled student makes a formal complaint that the provider did not put in place agreed reasonable adjustments during the academic year. They explain that lecturers across different modules appeared to be unaware of the agreed adjustments, and often didn’t provide copies of lecture materials in advance. They also say they were made to sit a timed in-class assessment without arrangements being made for a separate room or additional time. The student says they were made to feel they were being difficult when they tried to raise their concerns and that the persistent issues caused their mental health to deteriorate. The student explains that this negatively affected their academic performance throughout the year.
The provider carries out an initial assessment of the complaint. It decides that some of the issues raised may also be grounds for an academic appeal and, if the issues of complaint were upheld, it is likely that it would need to consider an academic remedy in addition to other steps to put things right for the student. The provider decides it would be pragmatic to carry out a single investigation and hold a single meeting to consider all the issues raised by the student. It explains to the student the process it plans to follow and why, what the student’s role in the process will be, and where they can get support and advice.
Case study 11: Considering connected issues under separate processes
A final year student makes an academic appeal against their degree classification on the ground that they had personal circumstances that affected their performance, and there was a good reason why the circumstances could not be made known to the exam board at the time. The student explains they felt very unwell on the day they had to sit an exam that was weighted at 50% of the module mark, and they believe this affected their performance in the assessment. They provide evidence of both their illness and their reasons for not making the board aware of their circumstances at the time.
The student also says that in previous years the module was assessed by two equally weighted essays, but they didn’t find out about the changes to the assessment methods until after the module had started. The student explains they wouldn’t have chosen the module if they’d known in advance they would need to sit an exam because they have anxiety which is brought on by exams. The student says that worrying about the exam ruined the final semester of their programme for them.
The provider carries out an initial assessment of the appeal and decides the information and evidence the student has provided about their illness meet its grounds for appeal and should be referred to an appeal panel for further consideration. The provider decides the other issues don’t fall within the scope of its appeals procedure, but it tells the student they can make a complaint about the way the changes to assessment methods were communicated if they want to, and how to do that. The student makes a complaint and receives separate outcomes for their appeal and complaint.
