Overview
A complaint was made on behalf of a student about the handling of his appeal against the University of Aberdeen's decision to terminate his candidature on a teaching course. This included his contention that the presence as Convener of the Student Progress Committee of a member of the department in which the original decision was made amounted to an appearance of bias. He was also unhappy about the provision and use of evidence.
Specific complaints and conclusions
The matters that have been investigated are that:
- (a) reasons given for the decision by the Student Progress Committee were inadequate (upheld);
- (b) the Student Progress Committee was not impartial (not upheld);
- (c) evidence was disclosed before the Student Progress Committee without proper notice (not upheld);
- (d) the Student Progress Committee did not consider all relevant evidence (not upheld); and
- (e) the Court Appeal Committee's handling of the appeal and the reasons given for their decision was inadequate (not upheld).
Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman recommends that the University issue guidance on the need to provide students with sufficient information about the reasoning behind the decision for them to make an appeal and to include in their standard letters an indication that they can request clarification if they require to do so before submitting an appeal.
The University has accepted the recommendation and will act on it accordingly. The Ombudsman asks that the University notify her when the recommendation has been implemented.