INSTITUTIONAL POLICY: COMPLAINTS AND ACADEMIC APPEALS

INSTITUTIONAL POLICY: COMPLAINTS AND ACADEMIC APPEALS

  • Document Reference: CMC-QA-POL-003
  • Version: 2026.1
  • Regulatory Compliance: Ofqual General Conditions of Recognition (Condition G2) / QAA UK Quality Code for Higher Education
  • Scope: Applies to all registered learners seeking to challenge an assessment decision or lodge a formal complaint regarding educational services.

1. Purpose and Scope Cambridge Modern College is dedicated to providing an objective, fair, and transparent learning environment. We recognize that learners must have access to clear, rigorous procedures to voice legitimate grievances or appeal formal grading decisions without fear of bias or recrimination. This policy establishes a structured, multi-stage roadmap designed to resolve academic appeals and operational complaints swiftly, fairly, and in absolute alignment with UK quality assurance benchmarks. 2. Distinction Between a Complaint and an Appeal To ensure administrative efficiency, the College maintains a strict operational distinction between these two procedures:

  • A Formal Complaint: An expression of dissatisfaction relating to non-academic, operational, or administrative services delivered by the College (e.g., technical system outages, administrative delays, or tutor responsiveness).
  • An Academic Appeal: A formal request by a learner to review a specific assessment decision or grading outcome verified by an Assessor, based on clearly defined procedural grounds.

3. The Academic Appeals Procedure (Grades & Assessments) Learners cannot appeal an assessment decision simply because they disagree with the academic judgment of the Assessor. A formal appeal will only be investigated if it satisfies one or more of the following Procedural Grounds:

  • Procedural Irregularity: Evidence that the assessment was not conducted in accordance with the published Module Specification or assignment guidelines.
  • Mitigating Circumstances: Severe, unforeseen personal circumstances (e.g., medical emergencies) that directly impacted performance, which the learner was unable to declare prior to the submission deadline due to valid constraints.
  • Assessor Bias or Malpractice: Verifiable evidence of unfair treatment, prejudice, or inconsistent marking application by the designated faculty asset.

The Three-Stage Appeals Roadmap: Stage 1: Informal Resolution (Tutor Review)

  • Timeline: Within 7 business days of receiving the official grade.
  • Action: The learner submits a written query directly to the Assessor via the CMC platform. The Assessor reviews the feedback and script, providing a formal clarification within 5 business days.

Stage 2: Formal Appeal (Internal Verification Audit)

  • Timeline: Within 10 business days of the failed Stage 1 resolution.
  • Action: The learner elevates the case by submitting form CMC-APP-01 to the Quality Assurance Department. An independent Internal Verifier (IV) who has had no prior involvement with the student or the script will re-evaluate the assignment against the Ofqual marking criteria. A definitive report is issued within 14 business days.

Stage 3: Executive Academic Board Review

  • Timeline: Within 5 business days of the Stage 2 report issuance.
  • Action: If procedural unfairness is still alleged, the case is brought before the Head of Institution and the Academic Board. The board audits the procedural handling of the appeal. The decision at Stage 3 represents the absolute final internal authority of Cambridge Modern College.

4. External Escalation to the UK Awarding Body In strict compliance with UK regulatory principles, if a learner has exhausted all internal appeal stages (Stages 1–3) and remains unsatisfied with the structural handling of the case, they hold the absolute legal right to escalate their grievance externally. The learner may file a final appeal directly with the partner UK Awarding Body (e.g., OTHM or Qualifi) for external adjudication. 5. Administrative Principles and Record Retention

  • Confidentiality: All details, documentation, and interviews relating to a complaint or appeal are kept strictly confidential, accessible only to personnel directly involved in the investigation.
  • No Retaliation Policy: The College guarantees that lodging a complaint or appeal will never negatively impact a learner’s academic standing, student relationships, or treatment by faculty assets.
  • Quality Auditing: The Quality Assurance Department logs all cases anonymously to conduct annual operational reviews, identifying systemic trends to continuously enhance our LMS infrastructure and tutor delivery models.