|
Salisbury University has established the Student
Academic Grievance Policy to give students of the
University community a forum in which to address
concerns related to academic matters (e.g. grade
disputes and professional program dismissals when they
do not involve an academic integrity violation). The
policy provides a method for aggrieved students to
express substantive complaints about academic matters
and have them resolved in a timely fashion. The
following matters are not covered by these grievance
procedures:
· Claims involving alleged discrimination or
harassment
· Claims relating only to alleged violations
of policies which were promulgated exclusively by the
University System of Maryland, actions of the Board of
Regents or actions of the Chancellor of the System, over
which SU has no jurisdiction
· Student judicial matters
· Grievances against University police
officers that could result in the imposition of any
discipline against the officer(s)
· Student Academic Integrity Violations
· Student Academic Misconduct Violations
Informal Grievance
Students are encouraged to attempt to resolve
differences between themselves and others in an informal
manner prior to initiating a formal grievance under this
policy. This may entail only a conversation in which the
views of both parties are aired in a mutually
satisfactory manner or a conversation using a neutral
third party for mediation. In the cases in which the
differences involve a faculty member, and the
differences are not resolved informally between the
faculty member and the student, the student is
encouraged to consult with the department Chair prior to
filing a formal grievance. If an informal
resolution cannot be achieved, the grievant may elect to
begin the formal grievance procedure that follows.
Formal Grievance
NOTE:
Extenuating circumstances may cause the Office of
Academic Affairs to extend the suggested time outlined
below.
Step One
The grievant must submit a formal grievance in writing
to the person alleged to be responsible for the actions
leading to the grievance
before the mid-semester point of the following major
semester as noted on the University’s master calendar).
Nothing in this
policy is to be construed to inhibit or prevent the
grievant from withdrawing a formal grievance
once the formal grievance procedures have begun.
A formal grievance must set forth in writing a statement
which clearly defines the basis of the grievance, a
chronology of events leading up to the grievance, the
names of people with knowledge of the event, pertinent
dates, a description of the actions taken against the
grievant which led to the dissatisfaction and a proposed
resolution to the situation.
Any documentation relevant to the grievance should be
attached to the letter. If known, information about
relevant
University academic policies should be provided. The
grievant has the burden to prove by a preponderance of
the evidence that the action or inaction complained
about did occur and that it was inconsistent with
University policies or procedures.
The person alleged to be responsible for actions leading
to the grievance will provide a written response to the
grievant within 10 working days of receiving the formal
grievance. The written decision should
address the specific issues raised in the grievance and
include all pertinent information.
Step Two
If
the response is not satisfactory to the grievant; he or
she has 10 working days to file the formal grievance
with the supervisor of the person (department Chair for
faculty member)
alleged to be responsible for the actions leading to the
grievance. The grievant must include all prior
written responses. The supervisor of the person alleged
to be responsible for the actions leading to the
grievance will provide a written response to the
grievant and the person alleged to be responsible
within 10 working days of receiving the formal
grievance.
Step Three
If
the supervisor’s response is not satisfactory, the
grievant has 10 working days to file a formal grievance
with the Dean of the school in which the dispute has
occurred. The grievant must include all prior
written responses. The Dean of the school will
provide a written response to the grievant within 10
working days of receiving the grievance.
Step Four
If
the response from the Dean of the school is not
satisfactory, the grievant has 10 working days to
forward the formal grievance to the Assistant Vice
President of Academic Affairs who will refer the
grievance to the Academic Policies Committee (APC) for
review. In the event the Academic Policies Committee is
not available, the Assistant Vice President of Academic
Affairs will forward the appeal to the Provost, who will
attempt to create an ad hoc committee to handle the
review as soon as practicable. (All further references
in this policy to the Academic Policies Committee
include the ad hoc committee where appropriate.)
Committee Review of Evidence
The Committee normally has 15 working days from
receiving the formal grievance to decide among the
following options:
1) Review Submitted Evidence: Render
a written decision based on the documents and materials
submitted with the appeal.
2) Investigation: Render a written
decision based on a series of interviews, a review of
documents, and/or any other action deemed appropriate
for the purpose of collecting additional information and
evidence necessary for an informed and reasoned judgment
to be rendered. The investigation, including
interviews, will usually be completed within 20 working
days of the decision to conduct an investigation.
3) Hearing: Render a written decision
based on a hearing. If the Committee determines
that a hearing is to be held, the Committee shall send
written notice of the time, date and location to all
parties. The hearing shall be conducted as follows:
· The hearing shall be held at a reasonable
time when all parties (to the extent possible) are
available or have an opportunity to be present.
· The parties shall be entitled to make
opening and closing statements.
· The parties shall be entitled to present
evidence through witnesses and documents, and shall be
entitled to question witnesses. At the discretion
of the Chair of the Committee, direct questioning by a
party of a witness, including an opposing party, may not
be permitted; rather, the parties may be required to
convey their questions to the Committee Chair, who will
convey them to the witness.
· Students are permitted to seek the support
of a non-legal advocate for assistance in the
preparation of a case before the Academic Policies
Committee. The advocate may counsel the grievant
during the hearing but shall not officially speak or
participate formally in the proceedings. In all
cases, the advocate must be a member of the University
faculty, staff, or student body.
· Neither party may be represented by an
attorney at the hearing, unless they are facing or are
likely to face criminal charges relating to the subject
of the grievance. Under such circumstances the
University legal counsel must also be present. At no
time may legal counsel give statements or participate in
questioning witnesses or Committee members.
· The hearing shall be closed with attendance
limited to individuals directly connected with the case
as determined by the Chair of the Committee. The
University may record the hearing at the discretion of
the Chair. Any University recording will be
University property for University reference only and
will not be made part of the student’s University
record.
· Formal rules of evidence need not be
followed at the hearing. The Committee may receive such
evidence as a reasonable person would consider reliable
in making important decisions. If a question arises
about the authenticity of a document or the
reasonableness, relevance or redundancy of evidence, the
Chair of the Committee shall be the final decision maker
on the evidence’s admissibility.
· The parties may request, in writing, that
the Committee contact specified persons to appear at the
hearing to testify on behalf of the parties. The request
must be made at least five working days before the
scheduled hearing in order to allow ample time for the
Committee to make the requests.
· The Chair of the Committee shall be
responsible for conducting the hearing in an efficient
and decorous manner and shall rule on all disputes
related to the procedures used throughout the
proceedings. Reasonable limits may be set by the Chair
on the length and nature of the opening statements, the
evidence presented and on the duration of the hearing.
At any time, the Chair may seek the advice of legal
counsel.
· Since the University lacks full judicial
authority, such as the power to subpoena or place
witnesses under oath, a party’s procedural rights cannot
be coextensive with or identical to the rights afforded
the accused in a civil or criminal legal proceeding. The
procedures outlined are designed, however, to assure
fundamental fairness and to protect parties from
arbitrary or capricious disciplinary action. Deviations
from these procedures shall not necessarily invalidate a
hearing or the results of a hearing unless significant
prejudice results.
· When possible the hearing should be
completed within 20 working days of the decision to
conduct a hearing.
Committee Findings
After the Committee has completed its review, the
Committee shall issue a written decision based on
findings of fact and conclusions, including procedures
followed and any applicable University policies and
procedures, usually within 10 working days, and shall
provide a copy of the findings to all directly involved
parties, including, but not limited to, the parties
involved, the department Chair, the Dean of the school,
the Office of Academic Affairs and the Assistant Vice
President of Academic Affairs.
Appeal of Committee’s Findings
If either party elects to appeal the decision of the
Committee, he or she must provide written notice of the
appeal to the Provost, within 10 working days from the
date of the Committee’s written decision. The
written appeal should set forth all of the reasons that
support reversal of the Committee’s decision and include
any supporting documentation.
The Provost has the discretion to take any action
necessary to thoroughly complete a review, and then will
issue a decision, which will be binding and final.
The decision will be conveyed in writing to the student,
the faculty member, department Chair, Dean of the
school, the Office of Academic Affairs, the Assistant
Vice President of Academic Affairs, and the Academic
Policies Committee usually within 10 working days.
Revised Document Approved
by the Faculty Senate on May 11, 1999
Second Revisions of
Document Approved by Faculty Senate on March 13, 2001
Revisions Approved by
Provost on October 7, 2002
Revisions Approved by
Faculty Senate on March 29, 2005, and Provost on May 17,
2005
Revisions Approved by the
Faculty Senate on May 5, 2009 and the Provost on May 15,
2009
Formatting revisions made on September 30, 2009
Revisions
Approved by the Academic Policies Committee on January
15, 2013
|
