Student Handbook 2011-12

Student Complaints

Print page as PDF

These pages provide information about the procedures for student complaints and appeals in the University.

The University is committed to high quality of educational and other provision for students, and encourages students to say where there is cause for concern in individual or general matters. It undertakes to take such representation seriously. In raising possible issues of complaint, students themselves will have to be aware of their obligations as members of the University.

The University aims to handle complaints in a way which is sympathetic, fair, and efficient, which encourages informal conciliation, facilitates early resolution, maintains individual privacy and confidentiality, and permits useful feedback.

1. Student complaints: initial informal process

At the earliest stages, a complaint may be resolved with the support, involvement or intervention of College officer or a member of University staff. Students wishing to make a complaint, or to appeal against a decision already made, are therefore encouraged, in the first instance to consult and seek the advice of either:

• an appropriate College officer - for example, their Tutor, Senior Tutor, Graduate Tutor, or Director of Studies - as the College assumes pastoral and other responsibilities , and moreover provide a range of tutorial services and support for all matriculated students (both undergraduate and postgraduate);

or

• a University teaching officer - for example, a University Lecturer, Reader or Professor -, an appropriate departmental Administrator, or the Head of the the University Institution, Faculty or Department concerned.

Alternatively, advice can be sought, as appropriate, from the University Counselling Service, the Disability Resource Centre, or other members of University staff. Both CUSU and the Graduate Union can offer advice and guidance on these matters; there is a jointly-run CUSU/GU Student Advice Service, which has a dedicated professional Student Advisor.

It is advisable to voice concerns or to register the nature of a complaint as soon as possible, and to seek informal resolution and conciliation if possible, as this facilitates early resolution. Raising an issue can often resolve a problem quickly and informally; a complaint (which may, for instance, be founded on misunderstanding or disagreement) can sometimes simply require a calm, balanced and non-prejudicial discussion between parties, without the need for any further action. Complaints should be taken up with someone in the institution responsible for the service or facilities in question. For problems relating to University teaching or lectures, an officer in the relevant Faculty or Department should be approached, and for problems relating to supervisions, the Tutor or Director of Studies in the student's College should be contacted. Graduate Students may prefer to approach their research supervisor or advisor/mentor, their Head of Department, or a representative of their departmental Graduate Education Committee, or similar body.

If, however, a student feels that a complaint has not been dealt with satisfactorily at the initial, local level or if the problem is of a more serious nature, then other, formal procedures are available.

2. Student complaints and appeals: formal University procedures

The University has established a range of student complaint, appeal and review procedures, designed to cover academic, non-academic and personal matters. The principal procedures and processes for student complaints and appeals - and similar procedures or relevant guidance - is summarised at 2.2. (Some procedures are also laid out in more detail in the Annexes at the end of this section.)

2.1 Some general points about the procedures:-

• The University's procedures have been developed in line with guidance issued by Universities UK and the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA). They also take account of recent NUS reviews of institutional complaints and appeals procedures, and they reflect advice or recommendations received from the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education.
• Some procedures are quite specific as to the domains which they cover and are limited as to the grounds on which representations or applications may be made. Others have general applicability, where no other, discrete procedure is available. Students are expected, and encouraged, to exhaust informal routes wherever possible, and to use the correct procedure for the matter they wish to complaint about.
• Complaints and appeals against matters of academic judgement are largely outside the scope of the University's procedures.
  ('Academic judgement' might be defined as 'the professional and scholarly knowledge and expertise which members of University staff and external examiners draw upon in reaching an academic decision'; academic judgement therefore includes, but is not restricted to, decisions about academic standards attained, marks and grades to be assigned, and degrees/degree classifications to be awarded, etc.). Matters of academic judgement are, similarly, not subject to review by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA). There is, however, some provision, under the University's review regulations for examinations (next point, and below) for representations to be made about an examination and the circumstances which may have led to an academic decision or judgement being made.
• The review regulations for examinations (undergraduate and certain other qualifications; Graduate Students) are in the nature of 'Academic Appeals' or 'Exam Appeals' (as they are sometimes termed in other universities), and they provide for representations to be made on clearly delimited grounds (material circumstances relating directly to the examination; procedural irregularities; demonstrable evidence of prejudice, bias, or inadequate assessment). As such, the regulations do not provide for a complaint with respect to the student's course of study - teaching matters, provision of services and support, etc.; the Student Complaints Procedures is available to deal with complaints about such matters.
• Students are advised that there are other, discrete mechanisms - which are not complaint procedures as such - that provide for applications to be made for allowances or other adjustments in certain mitigating circumstances - for instance, (examination) allowances for illness, etc. (e.g. where there is satisfactory evidence that the candidate has been hindered by illness or other grave cause in preparing for or taking the examination or any part of the examination for the degree or other qualification concerned). For undergraduate and certain postgraduate students, applications for allowances of this nature are the responsibility of the Applications Committee of the Council (http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/exams/applications/); for Graduate Students, the Board of Graduate Studies (http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/gradstud/exams/after/allowances.html) is the authority for considering such applications. Students are strongly urged to consult, and discuss an application with, their Tutor, who in most instances will responsible for making representations on the candidate's behalf.
• Notwithstanding the information provided in this Handbook, the University Statutes and Ordinances remain the regulatory basis for all activity in the University and have primacy over all other guidance and information, etc. including the information provided in this Handbook. It is important therefore that a student intending to submit a complaint or an appeal has familiarised themselves with the provisions of the relevant University regulations. The University Statutes and Ordinances are available online:-
  • PDFs http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/univ/so/pdfs/
  • HTML http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/univ/so/current/index.html

2.2 Summaries of the procedures and related guidance

(a) Student Complaints Procedures: general procedure approved by the Council

(b) Review Procedure for Examinations for Undergraduate and Certain Other Qualifications

(c) Review of the Results of Examinations for Postgraduate Qualifications

(d) Review of Decisions of the Applications Committee of the Council

(e) Fitness for Medical Practice (Appeal Tribunal)

(f) Fitness for Veterinary Practice (Appeal Tribunal)

(g) Technology Appeal Tribunal (dealing with decisions relating to technology transfer (IPR))

(h) Review of the Results of Examinations for the Degrees of Doctor of Medicine and Master of Surgery

(i) Statutory disciplinary proceedings through the University Courts (Summary Court; Court of Discipline; Septemviri)

(j) 'Dignity at study': guidance for students

The Guidance issued by the University Council's Standing Advisory Committee on Student Matters - which covers circumstances where students have complaints concerning the behaviour of other students (and who consider that they have been harassed or bullied by another student or students) - is published in the 'Welfare' section of this Handbook.

(k) Procedures for dealing with 'Dignity at work' and with 'Race and religion' issues

The University's Dignity at Work policy and procedures - which apply in circumstances where a student has a complaint concerning the behaviour of a member of University staff (and who consider that they have been harassed or bullied by a member of University staff) - can be found on the Human Resources Division website at http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/hr/policy/dignity/. Certain issues relating to equality and diversity (including race and religion) are dealt with by the Human Resources Division under specific procedures in this area - see http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/offices/hr/equality/.

3. Student complaints: complaints about the Colleges

Colleges are legally independent of the University and as such have established their own complaints, review and appeal procedures. Complaints which arise within the college teaching, learning and working environment should normally be dealt with under the appropriate college procedure. Colleges are separately subject to review by the Office of Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) - including in relation to a college's handling of matters relevant to a student's complaint about a University matter.

4. Student complaints: other University institutions

The Institute of Continuing Education (ICE) has its own complaint and review arrangements, and is separately subject to review by the Office of Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA). A number of ICE students may have access to some of the University procedures outlined above - for example, students on courses leading to a M.St. Degree, or similar level qualifications.

5. Student complaints: complaints about the student unions

As required by the Education Act 1994, the Cambridge University Students' Union (CUSU) and the Graduate Union each have procedures for complaints:

• CUSU
• Graduate Union

For complaints that relate directly to the advice and support services provided by the CUSU- GU Student Advice Service, there is a discrete procedure to be followed - see http://www.studentadvice.cam.ac.uk/contacts/complaints/.

6. The Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA)

A student who remains dissatisfied following completion of the University's internal formal review or complaint procedures, and after receipt of a Completion of Procedures letter (normally issued by the officer responsible for the administration of the complaint), may be able to apply for a review of their complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) providing that the complaint they take to the OIA is eligible under its Rules. The service is free to students. The OIA operates strict time limits: OIA Complaint Forms must be received by OIA within three months of the date of issue of the Completion of Procedures letter.

There are defined rules over the areas that can be reviewed. In general, the scope of complaints that the OIA can review covers the following (not exhaustive):

• Teaching, facilities, and other services provided by the University
• Research supervision
• Student accommodation
• Welfare and student accommodation - e.g. complaints relating to support services
• Discrimination- race, sex, disability, age, sexual orientation or religious belief
• Bullying and harassment
• Maladministration
• Procedural irregularities
• Disciplinary matters, including plagiarism
• Fitness to practice issues

Some matters are excluded from OIA review, such as:

• Issues relating to 'Admissions'
• Matters of 'Academic Judgment'
• Matters which have already been considered by a court or tribunal and where the proceedings have been concluded
• Matters which are being considered by a court or tribunal where the proceedings have not been stayed
• Matters which the OIA consider have not materially affected the complainant as a student

Full information - including the leaflet, An Introduction to the OIA for Students, guidance on submitting a complaint, and the OIA Complaint Form - can be found on the OIA's website at http://www.oiahe.org.uk/. Students may also wish to seek advice from the students' unions about taking a complaint to the OIA.

7. Student complaints and appeals: administration

The University's Deputy Academic Secretary has overall responsibility, under the Registrary and the Academic Secretary, for student complaints and academic appeal matters, including representations to, and relations with, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA). Several officers in the University Offices have responsibility for the administration and management of student complaint, review and appeal processes in particular domains:

• The Deputy Academic Secretary (Education Section, Academic Division, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge CB2 1SB): responsibility for the 'Review Procedure for Examinations for Undergraduate and certain other Qualifications', and the 'Procedure for the Review of Decisions of the Applications Committee'
  
  
• The Secretary of the Board of Graduate Studies (Academic Division, 4 Mill Lane, Cambridge CB2 1RZ) : responsibility for the procedure for the 'Review of the Results of Examinations for Postgraduate Qualifications'
  
  
• The head of the Student Complaints & Appeals office, Academic Division, 4 Mill Lane, Cambridge CB2 1RZ): responsibility for applications submitted to the Registrary under stage 3 (Formal Process) of the 'Student Complaints Procedure', and for Appeal Tribunals dealing with decisions relating to Fitness for Practice of medical and veterinary students.

ANNEXES

The regulations annexed here are extracts from the University Statutes and Ordinances, and incorporate where possible any changes as amended by Grace (published in the Cambridge University Reporter). Students are advised that the definitive source of University regulations is the current edition of the Statutes and Ordinances, as amended from time to time; these have primacy over the information published in this Student Handbook.

Annex A - Student Complaints Procedure approved by the University Council

[Statutes and Ordinances, Chapter II: Matriculation, Residence, Admission to Degrees, Discipline]

The Council shall publish and keep under review a procedure for determining complaints by members of the University in statu pupillari.

STUDENT COMPLAINTS PROCEDURE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL

The University is committed to high quality of educational and other provision for students, and encourages students to say where there is cause for concern in individual or general matters. It undertakes to take such representation seriously. In raising possible issues of complaint students will themselves be aware of and have observed their obligations as members of the University.

The University aims to handle complaints in a way which is sympathetic, fair, and efficient, which encourages informal conciliation, facilitates early resolution, maintains individual privacy and confidentiality, and permits useful feedback.

This procedure is for all people matriculated as students in the University, undergraduate and postgraduate. Non-matriculated students have their own procedures (for example under the Institute of Continuing Education).

A complaint will normally be about a problem encountered by a student in connection with educational or other activities or services provided by the University. It will not necessarily be against anybody, whether a person or an institution, although some complaints may be against individuals or University institutions. Complaints principally arising about matters covered by other specific procedures (such as those for the review of graduate or undergraduate examination results, or the codes of practice about racial and sexual harassment) should be raised under those procedures.

Because the purpose of the complaints procedure is, if possible, to resolve problems, a complaint should be made promptly, in an attempt to resolve them quickly and informally. The procedure, therefore, has three stages, and the Council hope that most problems will be solved in the first two stages of advice, and informal process. The three stages are:

1. Discussion and Advice
2. Informal Process
3. Formal Process

Each stage is described in a later section.

Some general points about the Student Complaints Procedure
The student is entitled to fair and independent consideration of a complaint. The rights of the student and the rights of any person complained against are both important and must be kept in balance. Every effort will be made to ensure that both are treated with fairness and dignity. Complaints will not be treated as though lodged against the University unless that is stated to be the case. There will be separation between the provision for advice and provision for dealing with or adjudicating on a complaint. The student should not suffer retaliation for making a complaint in good faith and a student who believes that he or she has suffered a reprisal should raise the matter. If a complaint which is not upheld is found to have been made maliciously, the student may be subject to disciplinary procedure.

The student may withdraw a complaint or stop the process at any time in Stage 1 or 2 and, in Stage 3, with the consent of the Chairman of the panel. Personal privacy will be respected. Confidential information will not be communicated without the consent of the student, other than in exceptional circumstances (for example in reporting an alleged criminal offence to the Police). The student has a free choice of adviser and of representative, who need not be the same person. Normally this would be a College Tutor, but students are free to go to someone else if they prefer.

Complaints will be dealt with promptly to ensure that delay does not hinder fair resolution. Minor complaints will normally be resolved at an early stage.

A complaint can only be brought by a student affected, although several affected students may act together. A particular complaint cannot normally be pursued under both University and College procedures.

If a complaint is upheld there should be a satisfactory remedy or outcome, which may include:

• a full explanation;
• an apology (which is not an admission of liability);
• the matter put right if possible;
• if appropriate, some kind of financial recompense (for example if the student had paid for something which he or she did not receive);
• if appropriate, disciplinary action may be taken.

Written records will be kept of complaints. The student will have access to the documents submitted about his or her case, and those taking part in the complaint will be informed that this is so. Otherwise the records will be confidential. An annual report will be made to the Council and the General Board, in which references to individual cases will be made anonymously.

Stage 1: Discussion and Advice

1.1. It is very important to get early advice about problems. Often, this can resolve the matter quickly and informally.

1.2. Normally, a student would seek the advice of a College officer such as a Tutor, or Director of Studies, or if a graduate student their University Supervisor.

Other possibilities include:

• other relevant members of the academic staff of the University;
• the University Counselling Service;
• the Disability Resource Centre;
• appropriate advisers or mentors in University Faculties or Departments;
• officers of CUSU (e.g. the welfare officer, the academic affairs officer, or the women's officer) or the President of the Graduate Union;
• administrative staff of Faculties and Departments;
• appropriate officers of the Central Administration (e.g. for graduate students, officers in the office of the Board of Graduate Studies).

1.3. The student can expect to be given advice on how to proceed and on an appropriate course of action, advice about what would constitute an appropriate remedy, and an opportunity to consider whether there is indeed a complaint to be addressed. The student will then be in a position to decide whether to proceed further, and how.

Stage 2: Informal Process

2.1. It is in the interest of the students that a complaint to be dealt with informally should be raised at the 'local' level (in the Faculty, Department, or relevant University service) as soon as possible. If there has been a delay the student should explain the reason. The student should if possible record the complaint in writing (the advice about a written statement in Stage 3 may be helpful).

2.2. The student should if possible raise the complaint directly with the person responsible for the matter. It may not always be easy to do this if the complaint is about the conduct of this person: if for some reason the student cannot go direct to the person alone he or she should ask for someone else to be present, or should raise the matter with another person in the organization concerned (the Head, Deputy Head, or Secretary of the organization, or a person or persons nominated for the purpose).

2.3. If possible a suitable solution will be agreed and implemented, to solve the problem.

2.4. If the student is dissatisfied with the outcome of such an informal process, he or she may consider whether to raise the matter formally through Stage 3.

Stage 3: Formal Process

3.1. Students must exhaust informal routes before making a formal complaint, or give a good reason for not doing so. A good reason might be that the problem is particularly serious, or that when it was raised informally there was refusal to deal with it. Informal processes are suitable for dealing with many problems, but if a complaint includes very serious allegations, and especially where a person complained against must have an opportunity to give his or her side of the matter, it may be necessary to refer straight to Stage 3. If informal routes seem not to have been exhausted a formal complaint may be referred to informal resolution.

3.2. A student wishing to make a formal complaint must do so in writing. The written statement initiates the formal process and must include a description of what has happened to give rise to the complaint including dates, times, and other details. It is necessary to show that something has gone wrong in the discharge of a University duty towards the student, and that the student had suffered as a result. The statement should include:

• the name of the person or University institution about whom/which the complaint is made (but a complaint need not necessarily be against a person or institution);
• the name of any witnesses who will corroborate the complaint, including a written statement from each to say that they have given their consent;
• documentary evidence, together with a list of contents and numbered pages;
• an outline of what action a student would like to be taken or what remedy he or she is seeking;
• if desired, the name of the person who has agreed to accompany, support, or represent the student at any meeting or hearing;
• it would be almost always sensible for the student to discuss the written statement of the complaint with an appropriate adviser (for example those named in paragraph 1.2). The complaint should be addressed to The Registrary at the University Offices, The Old Schools, Cambridge.

3.3. A complaint will be referred to a Reviewer, not connected with the College or Department of the student, for consideration. If the student wishes, the Reviewer will act with a student assessor, also not connected with the College or Department of the student.

3.4. The University Council will maintain a panel of potential Reviewers and a panel of potential student assessors. The Reviewer, and if necessary the student assessor, for a particular complaint will be designated by the Registrary, or a deputy. The student will have an opportunity to object, for good cause, to a person designated and the Registrary, or the deputy, will rule on the objection.

3.5. The written statement of complaint will also be referred to any person or University institution concerned, so that they can, if they wish, make a written response, to be considered by the Reviewer and the assessor.

3.6. The Reviewer will normally hear the representations about the complaint in person, but the Reviewer may also determine that the complaint should be dealt with on the basis of written submissions without a hearing. If a hearing takes place the student may be accompanied by an adviser or friend.

3.7. The Reviewer will issue a report, to which the student assessor, if any, may append any comments. The report will contain findings about the complaint, and may make recommendations as to remedies, if any, to be adopted, or other action recommended to be taken.

3.8. The Reviewer may terminate the proceedings, determine that a complaint is rejected as vexatious or frivolous, or refer the complaint for informal resolution as in Stage 2.

3.9. Legal representation and legal advice are not necessary in Stage 3.

3.10. The Reviewer will not (without agreement by those concerned) take into consideration documents or information which are not available to the student, the Reviewer, and to any person or University institution concerned. The Reviewer may request disclosure of documents requested by the student or any person or institution concerned. The Reviewer will seek to ensure that appropriate safeguards are made for the confidentiality of disclosed documents.

3.11. The Registrary, or the deputy, will nominate an administrative officer to assist the Reviewer. This officer has the right to be present throughout the whole proceedings of any hearing, and will prepare the draft report. The officer will also issue the completion of proceedings' letter for the purposes of possible further application to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA), if review or complaint procedures with the University are then believed to be completed.

Timing

A complaint under Stage 2 or 3 shall be made within three months of the occurrence of the matter complained about; a complaint under Stage 3 following from one under Stage 2 shall be made with three months of the completion of Stage 2; unless, exceptionally, the Reviewer allows a longer time, for exceptional good cause.

[Applications under the Student Complaints Procedure should be submitted to the Registrary on a Form, which can be downloaded here in PDF or Word format.]

Annex B - Review Procedure for Examinations for Undergraduate and Certain Other Qualifications

[Statutes and Ordinances, Chapter III: Examinations]

REVIEW PROCEDURE FOR EXAMINATIONS FOR UNDERGRADUATE AND CERTAIN OTHER QUALIFICATIONS

Amended by Graces 3 of 3 November 2010 and 3 of 13 July 2011

1. The following regulations shall apply to any University examination listed in the Schedule to these regulations.

2. No representatives under these regulations shall be considered unless they relate to

1. the conduct of the examination or;
2. a decision by a Faculty Board or comparable authority not to allow a student who has completed the requirement for the B.A. Degree to progress to that Part of a Tripos required for the M.Eng. or the M.Math. or the M.Sci. Degree.

3. No representations under Regulation 5 shall be considered if they reach the Registrary later than 4 p.m. on the third day (excluding Saturday and Sunday) after the candidate concerned has completed all parts of his or her examination. In exceptional circumstances the Registrary may allow a short extension of this deadline.

4. No representations under Regulation 6 shall be considered if (a) for those relating to 2(a) above, they reach the Registrary later than one month after the date upon which the list of successful candidates is signed or (b) for those relating to 2(b) above, they reach the Registrary later than one month after the date upon which the Faculty Board or comparable authority reaches its decision. In exceptional circumstances the Registrary may allow an extension of these deadlines.

5. Representations concerning the conduct of an examination arising before the list of successful candidates is signed shall be submitted to the Registrary by the candidate or by a Tutor on the candidate's behalf. The Registrary shall thereupon refer the representations to the Chairman of Examiners for consideration by the Examiners at their final meeting. The Examiners shall take whatever action they think fit in the light of the representations. Within one week of the signing of the list of successful candidates, the Chairman shall submit a report to the Registrary including an explanation of the action taken by the Examiners on the representations. The Registrary shall thereupon send a copy of that report to the candidate, to the Tutor (if any) submitting the representations, and to the Senior Tutor of the candidate's College. If the representations reach the Chairman of Examiners after the final meeting they shall be considered in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 6.

6. Representations concerning the conduct of an examination arising after the list of successful candidates is signed shall be submitted to the Registrary by the candidate or by a Tutor on the candidate's behalf. The Registrary shall thereupon refer the representations to the Chairman of Examiners. The representations shall be considered by the Chairman and at least two other Examiners. Within one month of receiving the representations the Chairman shall submit a report to the Registrary including an explanation of any action which the Chairman has taken on the representations. The Registrary shall thereupon send a copy of that report to the candidate, to the Tutor (if any) submitting the representations, and to the Senior Tutor of the candidate's College. The same procedures shall apply to representations falling within Regulation 2(b) above, save that the Chairman of the Faculty Board or comparable body shall consider the representations with at least two other members and report to the Registrary accordingly.

7. If the candidate concerned is dissatisfied with the response from the Chairman of Examiners (or the Chairman of the Faculty Board or comparable body as the case may be), the candidate may apply to the Registrary for the matter to be considered by an Examinations Review Committee constituted in accordance with Regulation 8, provided that such an application shall not normally be considered unless it is received by the Registrary within three months of the date on which the report from the Chairman of Examiners (or the Chairman of the Faculty Board or comparable body as the case may be) is communicated in accordance with Regulation 5 or 6, as appropriate. In exceptional circumstances the Registrary may allow an extension of this deadline. The candidate shall, in the application, provide a full statement of his or her complaint.

8. A Review Committee appointed under these regulations shall consist of three members as follows:

(a) one member, who shall have appropriate experience in matters of procedure, appointed by the Council, as Chairman;

(b) one member who is external to the University appointed by the General Board;

(c) one member of the Regent House appointed by the General Board.

In the event that the Chairman declares an interest or is otherwise unable to act, the member under category (b) shall act as Chairman, and two members of the Regent House shall be appointed to act.

In the event that the member under category (b) declares an interest or is otherwise unable to act, two members of the Regent House shall be appointed to act.

9. The General Board shall maintain a panel of members of the Regent House who are willing to serve as members of a Review Committee in class (c), and shall appoint twelve persons to the panel, four persons being appointed in the Michaelmas Term of each year to serve for three years from 1 January following their appointment. When any representations are to be referred to a Review Committee, the General Board shall appoint one member of the panel for appointment as a member of the Review Committee for the particular case. In selecting a member of the panel for appointment as a member of a Review Committee, the Board shall exclude any person who has been involved in the particular case at an earlier stage. A person appointed a member of a Review Committee shall serve until the conclusion of the particular case for which he or she was appointed. In the event that the person so appointed is unable to do so, the General Board shall appoint a replacement member from the panel.

10. The Registrary, or a deputy appointed by the Registrary, shall act as Secretary to a Review Committee.

11. The Secretary to the Review Committee shall notify the candidate of the persons appointed to be members of the Review Committee. The candidate shall be entitled to object for good cause to any member so appointed. The Vice-Chancellor shall rule on any such objection, and his or her decision shall be final. If the Vice-Chancellor allows such an objection, another member shall be appointed to replace the person who was the subject of the objection.

12. A Review Committee shall consider any representations which are referred to them under Regulation 7 which in the judgement of the Committee constitutes a complaint on one or more of the following grounds:

1. that there existed material circumstances relating to the conduct of the examination (excluding circumstances relating to the candidate's course of study) of which the Examiners were unaware;
2. that procedural irregularities occurred in the conduct of the examination, which were of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to whether the Examiners would have reached the same conclusion had the irregularities not occurred;
3. that there is demonstrable evidence of prejudice, bias, or inadequate assessment in the examination process;
4. that, with regard to representations falling within Regulation 2(b), there existed material circumstances (excluding circumstances relating to the candidate's course of study) of which the Faculty Board or comparable body were unaware, or that procedural irregularities occurred in the Faculty Board's or comparable body's decision which were of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to whether that body would have reached the same decision had the irregularities not occurred, or that there is demonstrable evidence of prejudice, bias or inadequate assessment in that body's decision.

In considering the representations at this stage the Committee shall have power to seek statements from other persons or bodies, as they think fit. If the Committee are of the view that the case does not fall within any of the grounds specified above, they shall dismiss the complaint and shall inform the candidate accordingly.

13. Subject to the provisions of Regulation 12, any statement of complaint received by the Review Committee shall be made available to each of the following:

1. the Chairman of Examiners (or the Chairman of the Faculty Board or comparable authority if the complaint relates to Regulation 2(b));
2. any person against whom a complaint is laid;
3. any other person specified by the Review Committee.

Each of these persons shall be given an opportunity to submit a written statement to the Committee in response to the complaint. The Committee shall have power to seek statements from other persons or bodies, as they think fit.

14. Any statement submitted to the Review Committee under Regulation 13 shall be made available to the candidate who shall be afforded an opportunity to comment upon it.

15. The Committee shall appoint a day and time for a hearing at which the candidate shall be entitled to be present and to be accompanied by a Tutor or other adviser being either a junior member of the University, an officer of Cambridge University Students Union, or a member of the Regent House; any person accompanying the candidate shall be permitted to act as the candidate's representative and to speak on his or her behalf. Any person or persons against whom a complaint is laid shall also be entitled to be present (and to be accompanied by a member of the Regent House). The Committee may also, at their discretion, invite other parties to attend.

16. A Review Committee shall consider any complaint referred to them under Regulation 7 and shall have power to dismiss the complaint or, if they consider it justified:

1. to require the Chairman of Examiners to re-convene as many of the original Examiners as can conveniently be assembled for the purpose of reconsidering their earlier decisions on the particular case, no fewer than three Examiners inclusive of the Chairman to constitute a quorum; or
2. to require the General Board to appoint one or more additional Examiners to make an independent report or reports on the work presented by the candidate, and to require the Chairman of Examiners to convene a meeting of as many of the original Examiners as can conveniently be assembled together with the additional Examiner or Examiners to reconsider the earlier decisions on the particular case, no fewer than three of the original Examiners inclusive of the Chairman, and the additional Examiner or Examiners, to constitute a quorum; or
3. to require the candidate, or the candidate's work, to be re-examined under whatever arrangements
4. may be specified by the Review Committee, after consultation with the Chairman of Examiners;
5. to require (if the complaint relates to Regulation 2(b)) the Faculty Board or comparable body to reconsider their decision.

17. The Secretary of the Review Committee shall send written notification of the Committee's decision and the reasons for it to the candidate, the Chairman of Examiners (or the Chairman of the Faculty Board or comparable body if the complaint falls within Regulation 2(b)), and to the other parties specified in Regulation 13.

18. Subject to any other provisions of the Statutes and Ordinances, the decision of a Review Committee on a particular case shall be final.

19. The Chairman of Examiners may appoint a deputy or deputies from among the Examiners to act on his or her behalf in relation to the foregoing regulations during the Chairman's absence from Cambridge or for other good cause. The same power of delegation may be exercised by a Faculty Board or comparable authority or its Chairman for complaints falling within Regulation 2(b).

20. A Review Committee shall, if they so wish, be entitled to make general recommendations about examination procedures to the General Board, irrespective of the outcome of their consideration of a complaint.

SCHEDULE

Amended by Grace 4 of 15 December 2010

EXAMINATIONS FOR WHICH THE FOREGOING REGULATIONS APPLY

Examinations, including where appropriate Preliminary, Ordinary, and Qualifying examinations, taken by matriculated students and leading to the following qualifications:

Annex C - Review of the Results of Examinations for Postgraduate Qualifications

[Statutes and Ordinances, Chapter VI: Graduate Students]

REVIEW OF THE RESULTS OF EXAMINATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE QUALIFICATIONS

Amended by Grace 4 of 13 July 2011

1. The following regulations shall apply to any University examination listed in the Schedule to these regulations, and shall be limited to those cases where (i) the candidate has failed to be approved for the qualification for which he or she was examined or (ii) the candidate was approved for the qualification but did not meet the standard required, as specified by the Degree Committee, to be permitted to register for a second qualification for which registration as a Graduate Student is required.

2. The Board of Graduate Studies shall have power, in connection with any examination for a degree or other qualification, to remit a recommendation or resolution received from a Degree Committee concerning a particular candidate to the Degree Committee for further consideration. The Degree Committee may recommend a course of action as a consequence of any such remission but the power to determine the action to be taken lies with the Board of Graduate Studies and not with the Degree Committee

3. The Board shall consider any representations made by or on behalf of a candidate which constitute a complaint about the conduct of the examination in that candidate's case, provided that such representations shall not be considered unless they are received by the Secretary of the Board not later than three months after the date on which the result of the examination was communicated to the candidate. The Board shall consider the representations which in the judgment of the Board constitute a complaint on one or more of the following grounds:

1. that there existed material circumstances relating directly to the examination (excluding circumstances relating to the candidate's course of research or course of study) of which the Examiners were not aware;
2. that procedural irregularities occurred in the conduct of the examination, which were of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to whether the Examiners would have reached the same conclusion had the irregularities not occurred;
3. that there is demonstrable evidence of prejudice, bias, or inadequate assessment in the examination process.

If the Board are of the view that a complaint does not fall within any of the grounds specified above, they shall dismiss the complaint and shall inform the complainant accordingly.

The Board shall consult the Degree Committee concerned under Regulation 2 about any representations made under this regulation.

4. If after considering any views expressed by the relevant Degree Committee under Regulation 2 and any representations made by or on behalf of a candidate under Regulation 3:

1. the Board are satisfied that the examination of that candidate was properly conducted and that the complaint is unjustified, the Board shall so inform the candidate; or
2. if the Board are satisfied that the examination of that candidate was not properly conducted and that the complaint is justified, they shall have power, after consulting the Degree Committee concerned, the Examiners concerned, and any other persons or body specified by the Board:
   1. to require the Examiners to re-examine the candidate;
   2. if the candidate has not been examined orally, to require the Examiners to hold an oral examination;
   3. if the candidate has been examined orally, to require the Examiners to hold a further oral examination;
   4. to permit the candidate to submit a revised dissertation, thesis, or other exercise, to be examined by the same Examiners;
   5. to require the Degree Committee to appoint one or more additional Examiners to make an independent report or reports on the work submitted by the candidate;
   6. to require the Degree Committee to appoint new Examiners to replace the Examiners previously appointed, and to permit the candidate
      either (A) to be re-examined by the new Examiners,
      or (B) to submit a revised dissertation, thesis, or other exercise, to be examined by the new Examiners;
   7. to require the Examiners (either the Examiners previously appointed or new Examiners appointed under sub-paragraph (vi), as the case may be) to set fresh examination papers or other exercises, as appropriate, to be taken by the candidate under arrangements specified by the Board.

5. If, after the candidate has been informed of a decision taken by the Board of Graduate Studies the candidate, or a person acting on the candidate's behalf, makes representations challenging the Board's decision under Regulation 4(a) or rejecting one or more of the remedial steps determined by the Board under Regulation 4(b)(i) to (vii), then the Board shall refer such representations to a Review Committee constituted in accordance with Regulation 6, provided that those representations are received by the Secretary of the Board within three months of the date on which the Board's decision was communicated by the Secretary to the candidate. For the avoidance of doubt representations received after this period has expired shall not be considered.

6. A Review Committee appointed under these regulations shall consist of

1. the Vice-Chancellor, or a duly appointed deputy, as Chairman;
2. two persons appointed by the General Board.

The General Board shall maintain a panel of members of the Regent House who are willing to serve as members of a Review Committee, and shall appoint twelve persons to the panel, four persons being appointed in the Michaelmas Term of each year to serve for three years from 1 January following their appointment. When any representations are to be referred by the Board of Graduate Studies to a Review Committee, the General Board shall appoint two members of the panel to serve as members of the Review Committee for the particular case. In selecting members of the panel for appointment as members of a Review Committee, the Board shall exclude any person who has been involved in the particular case at an earlier stage. A person appointed a member of a Review Committee shall serve until the conclusion of the particular case for which he or she was appointed.

7. The Academic Secretary, or a deputy appointed by the Academic Secretary, shall act as Secretary to a Review Committee.

8. For the purpose of these regulations the term 'complainant' shall mean the student making a complaint, or on whose behalf a complaint is made.

9. The Secretary to the Review Committee shall notify the complainant of the persons appointed to be members of the Committee. The complainant shall be entitled to object for good cause to any member so appointed. The Vice-Chancellor shall rule on any such objection, and her or his decision shall be final. If the Vice-Chancellor allows such an objection, the General Board shall appoint another member of the panel to serve as a member of the Committee.

10. The Review Committee shall consider the representations made or referred to them under these regulations which in the judgement of the Committee constitute a complaint on one or more of the following grounds:

1. that there existed material circumstances relating directly to the examination (excluding circumstances relating to the candidate's course of research or course of study) of which the Examiners were not aware;
2. that procedural irregularities occurred in the conduct of the examination, which were of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to whether the Examiners would have reached the same conclusion had the irregularities not occurred;
3. that there is demonstrable evidence of prejudice, bias, or inadequate assessment in the examination process.

If the Committee are of the view that a complaint does not fall within any of the grounds specified above, they shall dismiss the complaint and shall inform the complainant and the Board of Graduate Studies accordingly. For the purposes of these regulations the term 'examination' relates to the assessment of the candidate's performance by the original or any subsequently appointed Examiners and not to any consideration of the case by the relevant Degree Committee or the Board of Graduate Studies.

11. Any representation considered by a Review Committee to fall within any of the grounds specified in Regulation 10 shall be made available to each of the following:

1. the Board of Graduate Studies;
2. the Degree Committee concerned;
3. the Examiners concerned;
4. any other person or body specified by the Review Committee.

Each of these parties shall be given an opportunity to submit a written statement to the Committee in response to the complaint. Such a statement may include reports of the Examiners or extracts from those reports. The Committee shall have power to seek statements from other persons or bodies, as they think fit.

12. Any statement submitted to the Review Committee under Regulation 11 shall be made available to the complainant and to the other parties specified in that regulation, each of whom shall be afforded an opportunity to comment on it.

13. Once the Review Committee have received the comments specified in Regulation 12, they shall appoint a day and time for a hearing at which the complainant shall be entitled to be present and to be accompanied by not more than two advisers, each of whom shall be either an officer of the Graduate Union, a sabbatical officer of Cambridge University Students' Union, or a member of the Regent House; one of these advisers shall be permitted to act as the complainant's representative and to speak on her or his behalf.

14. A Review Committee shall consider any complaint or any representations referred to them under Regulation 5 and shall have power to dismiss the complaint or, if they consider it justified:

1. to require the Board of Graduate Studies or the Degree Committee concerned to reconsider their
2. earlier decisions on the particular case;
3. to require the Examiners to re-examine the candidate;
4. if the candidate has not been examined orally, to require the Examiners to hold an oral examination;
5. if the candidate has been examined orally, to require the Examiners to hold a further oral examination;
6. to permit the candidate to submit a revised dissertation, thesis, or other exercise, to be examined by the same Examiners;
7. to require the Degree Committee to appoint one or more additional Examiners to make an independent report or reports on the work submitted by the candidate;
8. to require the Degree Committee to appoint new Examiners to replace the Examiners previously appointed, and to permit the candidate
   either (i) to be re-examined by the new Examiners,
   or (ii) to submit a revised dissertation, thesis, or other exercise, to be examined by the new Examiners;
9. to require the Examiners (either the Examiners previously appointed or new Examiners appointed under sub-paragraph (g), as the case may be) to set fresh examination papers or other exercises, as appropriate, to be taken by the candidate under arrangements specified by the Review Committee.

15. The Secretary to the Review Committee shall send written notification of the Committee's decision and the reasons for it to the complainant and to the other parties specified in Regulation 11.

16. The decision of a Review Committee on any particular case shall be final. No person who applies for a review under the review procedure established by these regulations shall be entitled also for review of the same matter under the procedure for determining complaints by members of the University in statu pupillari established under the regulation for complaints by students.

SCHEDULE

EXAMINATIONS FOR WHICH THE FOREGOING REGULATIONS APPLY

Annex D - Review of decisions of the Applications Committee

[Statutes and Ordinances, Chapter I: The Chancellor and the Government of the University - The Council]

REVIEW OF DECISIONS OF THE APPLICATIONS COMMITTEE

The Council shall establish a procedure for the review of decisions taken by it in respect of individuals in exercise of its powers in respect of allowances of terms under the regulations for the precincts of the University and residence and its powers under the regulations for allowances to candidates for examinations. No person who applies for review under the procedure so established shall be entitled to apply also for review of the same matter under the procedure for determining complaints by members of the University in statu pupillari established under the regulation for complaints by students (p. 209).

APPENDIX

Amended by Notice (Reporter, 2010-11, p. 571)

Review of decisions of the Applications Committee of the Council: procedure

1. A student, or her or his Tutor with the student's consent, may seek review of a decision in relation to that student made by the Applications Committee.

2. A request for review shall be made in writing, stating the grounds of review, normally within three weeks of written notification of the Committee's decision (unless, in exceptional circumstances, the Registrary or a deputy permits a longer period). If the request includes, in the opinion of the Chair of the Committee, relevant additional information not previously available, the Committee will reconsider its decision at its next meeting following receipt of the request. If no such additional information is included or if, on reconsideration, the decision is reaffirmed by the Committee, the procedure described in the following paragraphs shall apply.

3. The Registrary or a deputy will appoint a reviewer chosen from a panel of potential reviewers maintained by the Council. Exceptionally, a panel of three reviewers may be appointed. If so, references below to 'the reviewer' shall be construed accordingly.

4. The reviewer will consider the request, the documentation available to the Committee (less any confidential medical information), the Ordinances which apply to the Committee's decision, and the Committee's Notes of Guidance. He or she will obtain an opinion from the Committee, seek such other information as he or she may require and, at her or his discretion, may hold a hearing (but there is no obligation to hold a hearing). The reviewer will issue an adjudication in writing as soon as possible, stating findings of fact, conclusions, and, if any, recommendations, for consideration by the Committee. The reviewer shall be concerned with determining whether there is evidence of: inadequate consideration of the matter by the Committee; the Committee having made a decision, to the detriment of the student, which is inconsistent with the relevant Ordinances or its own Notes of Guidance; or material circumstances of which the Committee was unaware and which were of such a nature as, had the Committee been so aware, to have been likely to cause the Committee to have reached a different decision.

5. The Committee shall normally accept the recommendation of the reviewer. If, exceptionally, the reviewer's recommendation is not accepted, a written explanation shall be provided to the reviewer, the student, and her or his Tutor and shall be submitted to the Council. The Committee may decide not to accept a recommendation in any instance in which: (i) the reviewer has sought to make a decision replacing that of the Committee; (ii) the reviewer's recommendation is inconsistent with the Ordinances governing Allowances; or (iii) the reviewer's recommendation is such that, were it to be accepted, it would set a precedent which would not be in the interests of the proper conduct of Committee's business or in the wider interests of the University. The Council (or an officer appointed by it) should be satisfied that the Committee's written explanation is consistent with one or more of these instances.

6. The conclusion of the Committee's consideration of any recommendation of a review is the normal final point of decision within the University. Any subsequent review would normally be by the national Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education, or exceptionally, if relevant, some other University review (for example by the Commissary under Statute D, V and the rules of procedure (p. 101)) or under Statute K, 5.

7. A reviewer may summarily dismiss an application which seems to her or him to be vexatious or frivolous.

The title of this document is: Student Handbook 2011-12: Complaints Procedure
URL: http://www.cam.ac.uk/staffstudents/studenthandbook/complaints.html