Case summary April 2023 | Justified
A group of students was studying a distance learning course. The students complained that the course didn’t live up to their expectations, based on the prospectus and other marketing materials.
Case summary April 2023 | Not Justified
A student complained to their provider about delays in giving them their timetable, changes to the scheduling of their classes, poor communication, and other administrative errors.
Case summary April 2023 | Settled
A student enrolled on a part-time postgraduate taught programme, intending to complete it whilst working full time. They were told before enrolling that they would need to commit to around 10 hours a week of teaching and personal study time.
Case summary April 2023 | Settled
A former student complained to the provider about the behaviour of a member of academic staff several years earlier. The student said the staff member had coerced them into a sexual relationship, which continued after they had graduated.
Case summary April 2023 | Not Justified
Student A was accused by another student, Student B, of sexual assault. Student B complained to the provider that Student A had sex with them when they were too intoxicated to give consent.
Case summary April 2023 | Not Justified
A student was accused of inappropriate behaviour by several other students. Two students said that the student had touched them inappropriately and without consent and other students said that the student had made them feel uncomfortable by frequently entering their personal space during gym sessions, and waiting for them outside the gym.
Case summary February 2023 | Justified
A student was found to have committed academic misconduct in their re-sit attempt in a taught postgraduate module. The provider applied a penalty from its standard table of penalties, that the module mark would be set at zero with a reassessment attempt if that were allowed by the regulations for the course.
Case summary February 2023 | Partly Justified
A postgraduate student was suspected of plagiarism and poor academic practice in two essays submitted in the previous academic year.
Case summary February 2023 | Justified
Student A and student B were found by their provider to have submitted identical essays for assessment in different modules. Student A immediately admitted that they had bought the essay and submitted it without alteration. Student B said that they were the author of the essay and they had uploaded it to an external company for help with proof reading. Student B suggested that this service had stolen and sold the work.
Case summary February 2023 | Justified
Two undergraduate students were suspected of sharing answers (colluding) during remote online assessments and the provider took action under the Student Conduct procedure.
We publish summaries of some of the complaints that we review. We always leave out of the summary any information that might identify the student who made the complaint. In some cases we decide that it is in the public interest to publish a summary of a complaint that includes the name of the provider.
