Department of History of Art (April 10, 1974) (Reaffirmed: September 1986) The department upholds the principle that a faculty member is always in the best position to determine the quality of a student's work. Where it can be proved that a clerical error, a procedural fault, or capricious or biased appraisal has resulted in the awarding of an unfair grade, the Department will do everything in its power to correct the error. It must be understood, however, that only the instructor of a course can determine the substantive value of a student's performance in that course. A student who feels that he or she has been unfairly graded should first consult with the instructor of the course in an effort at resolving the disagreement. If the grade was awarded by a teaching assistant, and if the student is not satisfied with the assistant's explanation of the grade, the student should then consult with the faculty member who supervised the course. If the student is not satisfied by the explanation(s) offered by the instructor of the course, he or she should submit to the Chairman of the Department a written appeal, citing the factors which bear upon the problem. He or she should also submit all papers and examinations written for the course and to which the student has access. These materials and the appeal should be submitted no later than three weeks after the student has been notified of the grade. Exceptions to this rule will be allowed only in extraordinary circumstances. Upon receipt of these materials, the chairman will appoint an ad hoc committee to review the appeal. This committee will consist of one undergraduate or graduate advisor (depending upon the status of the student), one faculty member whose field of specialization is related to the subject matter of the course, and two students chosen by lot from a suitable peer group (undergraduate majors, undergraduate non-majors, or graduate students). The Chairman will ask the instructor to whom the appeal has been made to respond to the appeal in writing no later than three weeks after the filing of the appeal. This response, together with the appeal and all relevant materials will be put into the hands of the committee. The committee will meet no later than one week after receiving all the aforementioned materials. Both the student and the faculty member will be informed of the time and place of the meeting and will be allowed to make an oral presentation to the committee. If after due deliberation, it is the consensus of the committee that the grade awarded was unfair, the committee will inform the faculty member of this opinion and suggest that the grade be changed. It will be possible to suggest a lower grade as well as a higher one. If no consensus is reached or if the consensus is that the grade should not be changed, the appeal procedure will terminate at this point. The only exception to this rule is where the student can prove a procedural error (see below), in which case his or her appeal may be forwarded to the Executive Committee of the Department. If the faculty member to whom the appeal has been made is asked by the committee to change the grade and refuses to do so, the grade will stand. However, the student will have the right to ask the Chairman of the Department or a representative to provide him or her with a letter recording the decision of the grievance committee and the refusal of the faculty member. A copy of this letter will be placed in the student's file if he or she so wishes. Procedural Error The Department defines a procedural error in the awarding of a grade as one of, or a combination of, the following: A mathematical error in the computation of a grade. A failure on the part of an instructor to read in its entirety a paper, exam, or other piece of written material required of the student. An inequity in the amount or nature of the work required of students in the course (this does not imply that an instructor may not make distinctions in the work required of different classes of students - e.g., graduate students, undergraduates, etc.) A failure to adequately announce or describe the requirements of a course. Announcements made in regularly scheduled class periods are to be considered adequate. An unreasonable delay in the grading of a piece of work submitted by a student. It should be emphasized that it is the student's responsibility to familiarize himself or herself with all of the requirements and procedures involved in any course. Did you find what you were looking for? If not, please email us at SAA.Webmaster@umich.edu. College of Literature, Science, and the Arts Student Academic Affairs 1255 Angell Hall, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1003 Phone:(734) 764-0332 Fax: (734) 764-2772 University of Michigan | College of LS&A | Student Academic Affairs | LS&A Bulletin Index This page maintained by LS&A Academic Information and Publications, G415 Mason Hall Copyright © 2001 The Regents of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA +1 734 764-1817 Trademarks of the University of Michigan may not be electronically or otherwise altered or separated from this document or used for any non-University purpose.