Consumer protection issues: Information about the programme - PI051516

University for the Creative Arts

We considered a complex complaint from a student who raised many issues about the content, teaching and assessment of her course at the University for the Creative Arts. Some of the issues related to academic judgment, which we cannot look at, and we found some of her other complaints Not Justified.

Consumer protection issues: Assessment and awards - PI051517

Anglia Ruskin University

A student at Anglia Ruskin University complained to us after his academic appeal was rejected by the University. He appealed on the grounds that there had been a material error in the assessment of one module.

International Students: Visa sponsorship - PI011501

London Metropolitan University

After the University’s licence to sponsor new international students was revoked it reached an agreement with the UK Border Agency (at the time the relevant agency) to enable existing international students to continue studying there, so long as they were attending and progressing satisfactorily. Where the University was unable to confirm satisfactory attendance or progress, the student’s registration would be withdrawn.

International Students: Visa sponsorship - PI011502

Sheffield Hallam University

An administrative error at the University led to the student’s application for an extension to his student visa being declined by the UK Border Agency.

Procedural issues: Responsibility on students - PI011505

Glyndwr University

A student was studying for an MBA. He did not submit coursework assignments or attend examinations for four modules, and was deemed to have failed due to non submission. These failures were second failures of these modules. The student was exited from the MBA course, but permitted to attempt to retrieve another module with a view to achieving a Postgraduate Certificate.

Procedural issues: Universities' discretion to set their procedures - PI011506

Cardiff University

A student submitted an appeal to the University against the mark that she had received for an assessment. She had received a fail grade and had not been permitted to continue on her programme. She appealed on the basis that an arithmetical error may have occurred and asked for her work to be remarked to see if it deserved a pass mark.

Procedural issues: Disadvantage from procedural error - PI011507

University of Hertfordshire

A student at the University of Hertfordshire was accused of assaulting a fellow student, resulting in an interim suspension. This suspension was then reviewed and the student was allowed to return on a limited basis. Subsequently the Student Disciplinary Panel for consideration of non-academic misconduct decided to suspend the student with immediate effect until the beginning of the following academic year. The University sent a letter to the student, confirming this decision and explaining her appeal rights against the decision of the Panel. The student decided to submit an appeal on the grounds of procedural irregularity; however this appeal was turned down as it did not meet the permitted grounds for review and an outcome letter was issued. The student’s subsequent request for a temporary lift of the suspension to allow the completion of her degree was also turned down.