Academic Calendar 2023-2024

Master of Finance - Beijing


1.1 Purpose

The purpose of the Academic Calendar is to acquaint students with the academic requirements, regulations, policies, procedures and expectations of the Program. It is the responsibility of the student to read and understand the entire Academic Calendar. Questions about any of its contents should be directed to the Program Director.

1.2 Acknowledgement of Territory 

Queen’s University in Kingston is situated on traditional Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee Territory. To acknowledge this traditional territory is to recognize its longer history, one predating the establishment of the earliest European colonies. It is also to acknowledge this territory’s significance for the Indigenous peoples who lived, and continue to live, upon it – people whose practices and spiritualities were tied to the land and continue to develop in relationship to the territory and its other inhabitants today. The Kingston Indigenous community continues to reflect the area’s Anishinaabek and Haudenosaunee roots. There is also a significant Métis community and there are First Peoples from other Nations across Turtle Island1 present today.

1 Turtle Island is the name of North America according to some Indigenous groups.


2.1 Jurisdiction 

Students of Smith School of Business at Queen’s University are governed by the regulations, policies and practices of this institution. 

Master of Finance (Beijing) students are enrolled at Queen’s University and are therefore subject to the policies, regulations, and requirements of Queen’s.  Students are also subject to the policies, regulations and requirements of Renmin University.

It is the responsibility of every student in the Program to read and understand these policies, regulations, and requirements as well as those of Renmin University. 

2.2 Program Format 

The Queen’s Master of Finance (Beijing) Program is approved by the Senate and Board of Trustees of the University, and by the Ontario Council for Graduate Studies. Upon graduation, students receive a Queen’s Master of Finance Degree. 

The Queen’s Master of Finance (Beijing) Program provides students with the opportunity to gain the educational and professional advantages of a Queen’s Program without interrupting a successful career.  The curriculum was designed with the understanding that students already have an undergraduate degree in business and management experience. Therefore, while management fundamentals in all functional areas will be reviewed and incorporated into our courses, the Program will focus on developing the skills and advanced knowledge required to lead today’s organizations.

2.2.1 Program Delivery
Queen’s Master of Finance (Beijing) Program holds most classes on weekday night and weekends on campus of Renmin University of China in Beijing. Students have the option to travel to Canada for one of the Queen's-led courses. 

The courses require individual and team preparation and are delivered primarily through fully interactive classroom teaching. 

During the orientation, students are introduced to the instructors, and program staff from both universities.

2.3 Timeframe 

Once registered in the Program, the student is expected to complete all degree requirements without interruption. The Program is normally completed in 10 to 11 months, beginning in September and ending in September of the following year.

2.4 Degree Requirements and Courses

The Queen’s Master of Finance (Beijing) Program is a 10-11 month program in which students complete 10 courses. To be eligible for graduation, students must complete all courses in the Program in the year in which they are registered, and uphold and/or meet each of the Academic Regulations (Section 3 of this document). 

2.4.1 Required Courses
All required courses for the Program must be completed in the year that the student is registered in the Program.

Students must adhere to the Program’s add/drop policy and deadlines for any changes to course registrations. The Program Sessional Dates include applicable add/drop dates.

2.4.2 Course Substitutions
Students must complete all required courses within the required timeframe to graduate from the Program. 

If extenuating circumstances prevent a student from completing the Program in the required timeframe, the student will be required to complete outstanding courses as directed by the Program Director or Academic Progress Committee. Normally, if one or more of the missed courses is not offered again in the year the student is registered in the Program, the student will be permitted to take the course in the subsequent year when the course is offered again.

2.4.3 Auditing Courses
A student may request to audit a course. A formal written request to audit must be made to the Program Director at least seven days before the first session of the course to be audited. Requests to audit courses will be considered depending on space, professor approval and other relevant course-specific factors. 

2.5 Grading

2.5.1 Queen’s University Grading 
The grading system for courses in the Queen’s Program is:

Letter Grade Grade Point Percentage
A+ 4.3 90-100
A 4.0 85-89.9
A- 3.7 80-84.9
B+ 3.3 77-79.9
B 3.0 73-76.9
B- 2.7 70-72.9
C+ 2.3 67-69.9
C 2.0 63-66.9
C- 1.7 60-62.9
D+ 1.3 57-59.9
D 1.0 53-56.9
D- 0.7 50-52.9
F 0.0 0-49.9

Other academic entries which may be assigned are:

  • P: Pass: no grade assigned
  • NG: Not graded: first term course of a multi-term course
  • FR: Failure with review: grade will be revised
  • AU: Audit
  • CR: Credit
  • TR: Transfer credit: no grade assigned
  • IN: Incomplete
  • DR: Course dropped
  • GD: Grade deferred
  • NEP: Not eligible to proceed
  • AG: Aegrotat*
  • IP: In progress
  • RTW: Required to withdraw

*Aegrotat: An academic entry that provides an estimated final grade or, if that is not possible, credit for a course without a grade because of extenuating circumstances beyond the student’s control that prevented the student from completing all work of the course, particularly the final examination. Normally at least 60 percent of the work to be evaluated in the course (assignments, midterms, final examination, as specified in the course) must have been completed. Requests for AG or CR standing should be made to the Program Director.

2.5.2 Grading Specifications
All final marks, including those assigned after special examinations, may be based on the results of formal examinations and on grades obtained from other work throughout the course, which may include essays, exercises, reports, presentations, class tests/quizzes, and class participation or other work. 

At the beginning of each course, the professor will provide a clear statement of the basis on which the final mark will be assessed. All work assigned and the weight that it will contribute to the final mark will be specified. Normally there is both individual and team work included in course assessments.

2.5.3 Class Participation
Class participation grades are allocated in some courses. Professors will specify the specific form and opportunities for participation marks at the start of the course. Some examples include contributions to class discussions or discussion boards, attendance, timely completion of assigned work, or other relevant behaviours determined by the professor.


Academic Regulations exist to maintain the standards of the Program, and to ensure the candidates of the Program have the mandatory knowledge and experience to merit receiving the Degree. Degrees are awarded according to the requirements and processes set out in the Academic Regulations.

Every student is responsible for knowing and meeting or upholding the Academic Regulations of the Program in order to progress through the Program and ultimately be eligible for the Degree. The Academic Regulations below are currently in effect. Regulations are consistently reviewed and may change from time to time. Any changes that take place during the academic year will be communicated to students; it remains the student’s responsibility to be aware of any such changes. 

3.1 Academic Regulations 

Each candidate for the Degree must successfully meet or achieve the Regulations below in order to be in Good Academic Standing, to progress through the Program, and to be eligible for graduation from the Program. In a case where a student violates any one of the Regulations, that student is normally required to withdraw from the Program (see section 3.2 for further information). 

Every student must achieve the following:

3.1.1 Complete Program Curriculum 
The student must complete all components of the curriculum as outlined in Section 2.

3.1.2 Overall Minimum GPA
The student must achieve a cumulative GPA of at least 2.7 (B-) including all courses taken in the Program.

3.1.3 Minimum Course Grades
The student may obtain final grades of less than 2.0 (C) in no more than the equivalent of 2 courses (6 units) throughout the Program.

3.1.4 No Failures
The student must obtain a final grade of at least 0.7 (D-) in each course.

3.1.5 Pass Individual Performance 
The student must obtain a grade of at least 0.7 (D-) in the assessment of individual performance of any course. Course professors will determine how individual performance is assessed in their course.

3.1.6 Pass Team Performance
The student must obtain a grade of at least 0.7 (D-) on the assessment of team performance of any course. Course professors will determine how team performance is assessed in their course.

3.1.7 Attendance
The student may not miss more than 25% of class sessions of any course.

Class attendance is monitored and concerns related to attendance will be addressed with the student. Note that repeated unexcused absences from class may also impact the assessment of performance in the Learning Team.

3.2 Academic Standing 

The following Academic Standings may apply, depending on individual circumstances:

3.2.1 Good Academic Standing
In order to progress through the Program and to be eligible for the Degree, a student must be in Good Academic Standing. A student is considered to be in Good Academic Standing when they uphold the Academic Regulations set out in Section 3.1 above.

A student who fails to uphold any one of the Academic Regulations is no longer in Good Academic Standing, and is normally required to withdraw from the Program. The student is considered to be in Academic Jeopardy until a decision is made by the appropriate body. 

3.2.2 Academic Jeopardy
A student who fails to meet any one or more of the Academic Regulations is deemed to be in Academic Jeopardy until a decision is made about their situation.

Students in this situation will first be reviewed by the Program Director. In some cases an informal resolution may be possible (for example, an opportunity to re-take an exam if the student has official evidence of being gravely ill on the day of the exam) and, if successful, the student may return to Good Academic Standing.

In cases where an informal resolution is not possible, the Program Director will inform the student in writing of the requirement to withdraw from the Program, subject to the student’s right of appeal.

3.2.3 Academic Probation
A student who has failed to meet one or more of the Academic Regulations and who has successfully appealed to the Academic Progress Committee may be permitted to continue in the Program, on Academic Probation, subject to specific terms, conditions, standards and timeframes tailored to the situation. 

A student who successfully completes the conditions of their Academic Probation will be released from Academic Probation and return to Good Academic Standing. A student who fails to meet the conditions of their Academic Probation will normally be required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal. 

3.2.4 Requirement to Withdraw 
A student who has failed to meet any one or more of the Academic Regulations is normally required to withdraw from the Program, subject to their right of appeal (see section 5). Further, a student who fails to meet the conditions of their Academic Probation will normally be required to withdraw from the Program.

3.2.5 Effective Date of Sanctions
Sanctions or adverse academic decisions, such as Academic Probation (and its terms and conditions) or a requirement to withdraw, shall take effect as soon as the student accepts the sanction OR exhausts (or allows to lapse) their right to appeal to the next level in accordance with Section 35 of Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline:

  1. Ordinarily, no sanction, penalty or requirement to withdraw shall be put into effect until the student affected has either exhausted all channels of appeal or has allowed the time for appeal to lapse. For the purpose of this provision, the University will normally consider an adverse academic decision to be a sanction.
  2. Notwithstanding subsection (1), where an academic unit determines that the interests of third parties may be prejudiced by the continued enrollment of a student in a course or program, the unit may decide that pending an appeal from an adverse academic decision, the student should not be permitted to continue in the course or program, or may be precluded from progressing to the next academic stage.
  3. A student who is subject to suspension from a program under subsection (2) may request that the Chair of the appellate body with jurisdiction over the matter expedite the hearing of the appeal. This request may result in a direction abridging the time for filing of documents, or other interim or preliminary direction made pursuant to Section 36 of Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline.


4.1 Academic Integrity 

Queen’s University is dedicated to creating a scholarly community free to explore a range of ideas, to build and advance knowledge, and to share the ideas and knowledge that emerge from a range of intellectual pursuits.

Queen’s students, faculty, administrators and staff therefore all have responsibilities for supporting and upholding the fundamental values of academic integrity. Academic integrity is a commitment to the fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility. Academic integrity concerns refer to issues that arise which deserve attention, and which may or may not, in the end, involve a departure from academic integrity, that is, a departure from these fundamental values. This involves what has traditionally been referred to as academic dishonesty but encompasses a much broader context to include educational measures associated with academic integrity. Academic integrity is constituted by the five core fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and responsibility (see International Centre for Academic Integrity) and by the quality of courage. These values and qualities are central to the building, nurturing, and sustaining of an academic community in which all members of the community will thrive.
Adherence to the values expressed through academic integrity forms a foundation for the "freedom of inquiry and exchange of ideas" essential to the intellectual life of the University.

The following statements from “The Fundamental Values of Academic Integrity” (2nd edition), developed by the International Center for Academic Integrity (ICAI), contextualize these values and qualities:

  1. Honesty: Academic communities of integrity advance the quest for truth and knowledge through intellectual and personal honesty in learning, teaching, research, and service.
  2. Trust: Academic communities of integrity both foster and rely upon climates of mutual trust. Climates of trust encourage and support the free exchange of ideas which in turn allows scholarly inquiry to reach its fullest potential.
  3. Fairness: Academic communities of integrity establish clear and transparent expectations, standards, and practices to support fairness in the interactions of students, faculty, and administrators.
  4. Respect: Academic communities of integrity value the interactive, cooperative, participatory nature of learning. They honor, value, and consider diverse opinions and ideas.
  5. Responsibility: Academic communities of integrity rest upon foundations of personal accountability coupled with the willingness of individuals and groups to lead by example, uphold mutually agreed-upon standards, and take action when they encounter wrongdoing.
  6. Courage: To develop and sustain communities of integrity, it takes more than simply believing in the fundamental values. Translating the values from talking points into action -- standing up for them in the face of pressure and adversity — requires determination, commitment, and courage.

Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with and adhering to the regulations concerning academic integrity. More information can be found in the Queens University Senate Academic Integrity Procedures – Requirements of Faculties & Schools. General information on academic integrity is available at Queen's University Academic Integrity along with School-specific information in the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy.

4.1.1 Departures from Academic Integrity

A departure from academic integrity includes any deliberate attempt to gain unfair advantage academically for oneself or others. All forms of departure from academic integrity are considered serious offences within the University community. The following defines the domain of relevant acts without providing an exhaustive list: Plagiarism
Allowing it to be thought that another's ideas or phrasings are one's own by failing to provide proper acknowledgment. Some examples are:

  • Copying and pasting from the internet
  • Copying a printed source or other resource without proper acknowledgment
  • Copying from another student in the same or different year of the Program or another Program
  • Copying from another’s test paper.
  • Using direct quotations or large sections of paraphrased material in an assignment without appropriate acknowledgment
  • Buying term papers or other assignments and submitting them as one's own
  • Submitting the same piece of work in more than one course without the permission of the instructors
  • Obtaining a copy of, or information about, a test or exam from an earlier section of the course and writing the test or exam later in the day or subsequent days. Use of unauthorized materials:

  • Possessing or using unauthorized study materials or aids during a test
  • Copying from another's test paper.
  • Using an unauthorized calculator or other aids during a test
  • Unauthorized removal of materials from the library, or deliberate concealment of library materials
  • Obtaining materials such as answer keys and using them to obtain an unfair advantage. Facilitation:

  • Enabling another's breach of academic integrity.
  • Making information available to another student, such as knowingly allowing one's essay or assignment to be copied by someone else, giving a copy of a test or exam to a student writing the same test or exam later in the day or subsequent days.
  • Selling or distributing term papers or other assignments
  • Knowingly assisting another person to conceal their departure from academic integrity. Unauthorized collaboration:

  • Working with others, without the specific permission of the instructor, on assignments that will be submitted for a grade.
  • This applies to in-class or take-home tests, papers, or homework assignments. Students may not collaborate without the instructor’s authorization. Forgery:

  • Utilizing counterfeit documents or statements (e.g., creating or altering a transcript, medical note or other official documents). Falsification:

  • Misrepresentation of oneself, one's work or one's relation to the University.
  • Altering transcripts or other official documents relating to student records
  • Impersonating someone in an examination or test
  • Submitting a take-home examination written, in whole or in part, by someone else
  • Fabricating or falsifying research data or source material (whether by commission or by omission)
  • Allowing someone else to do research work without the knowledge and approval of the instructor.
  • Failing to appropriately recognize the contributions of others.
  • Attributing authorship of work to persons other than those who have contributed to the work in a meaningful way.

4.1.2 Process for Investigating Suspected Departures from Academic Integrity
The Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy sets out complete procedures and processes for handling suspected departures from academic integrity. Students are responsible for familiarizing themselves with the policy. Normally, where a course professor has a concern about a possible departure from academic integrity, the professor will notify the student and investigate in accordance with Smith policy. The student will have an opportunity to respond, and their response will be considered part of the evidence in the case.

In complex cases, the professor may refer the case to the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Panel for investigation. In this situation, the Academic Integrity Panel will notify the student of the potential departure and investigate in accordance with Smith policy.

In cases of a subsequent departure from academic integrity (that is, where there is a previous departure on record for the student), the professor will make a finding but refer the case to the Academic Integrity Panel for the determination of a sanction.

4.1.3 Sanctions for Departures from Academic Integrity
Following the investigation of the suspected departure from Academic Integrity, the professor/Academic Integrity Panel will either: i) make a finding of a departure from academic integrity and impose a sanction (or refer the matter to the AI Panel for sanction); or ii) determine there was no departure and destroy all evidence of the notice and investigation.

Any student who is found to have committed a violation of academic integrity may face a range of sanctions, including but not limited to: receiving a warning, a grade of zero on the assignment, a failure in the course, a recommendation to Queen's Senate that the student be required to withdraw from the University for a period of time, or that a degree be rescinded. 

Records of findings of departures from AI are kept in the Dean’s Office and in the Program Office. Students who are found to have subsequent violations of academic integrity will normally face progressively more serious sanctions.

4.2 Illness and Extenuating Circumstances Policies 

4.2.1 Illness

A student who claims illness as a reason for missing academic obligations is responsible for informing the professor and the Program Director and may be required to provide evidence of illness. In keeping with University Policy on Academic Consideration for Students in Extenuating Circumstances, a student suffering from a short-term illness should submit the appropriate form outlining their needs.

A notification of absence from an examination must be accompanied by documentation as follows:

  • in cases of illness when a student is under the care of a physician, the student should provide a note from the physician. Retroactive doctors’ notes (i.e. notes dated from physicians after the illness) are not acceptable.
  • If a student is ill, but not under the care of a physician prior to and during an exam, they can provide the appropriate form(s) outlining their situation.

As a matter of academic integrity, a student is responsible for making an honest declaration concerning the nature of their illness and its impact on their academic obligations. False declarations may be investigated under the Smith Academic Integrity Policy.

4.2.2 Extenuating Circumstances

The Program adheres to Queen’s Policy on Academic Consideration for Students in Extenuating Circumstances and the principle of a good faith response to requests for consideration.

Extenuating circumstances means a personal circumstance beyond the student’s control that has a direct and substantial impact on the student’s ability to meet essential academic requirements or expectations. Extenuating circumstances include but are not limited to a sudden or acute physical or mental illness, serious injury to self or significant others, bereavement, a traumatic event, or other serious personal/family crisis. Extenuating circumstances may also include officially representing the university at a sanctioned event or through an invitation to participate in an event as a distinguished guest (e.g. national tournament, Olympics).

 A student who is unable to satisfy the requirements of a course or the Program due to extenuating circumstances must notify the Program Director in writing as soon as possible. Students may submit the appropriate form(s).

If the student is requesting a modification of the Program requirements, a formal written request should be submitted to the Program Director. The request for modification should include an explanation of the connection between the effects of extenuating circumstances on the academic performance, as well as the remedy the student is seeking.

The Program Director will respond to the student’s request for consideration promptly. The Program is committed to responding to students in a fair and consistent manner, taking into account the specific individual circumstances. The Program is also committed to upholding academic standards and ensuring that essential academic requirements are met.

4.2.3 Official Documentation

Official documentation, including notes from health care professionals, need not outline the specific details of the student’s condition, but must clearly indicate ways in which the circumstances directly affect the student’s performance, and verify that these effects were substantial enough to cause the academic disruption. Information about the start, duration and present state of the condition or circumstances, as well as a clear statement on whether the condition or circumstances have either improved or are being managed so that they will not have a significant detrimental effect on future academic performance, are essential.

Documents submitted may be verified by the Program administration. False statements or documents may be investigated in accordance with the Smith Policy on Academic Integrity

4.2.4 Unresolved Circumstances

The appeals process does not compensate for circumstances that the student is unable to resolve, or for which the student is unwilling to actively seek accommodation. In addition, the appeals process does not compensate for circumstances that are actively being accommodated, for example where a student’s permanent disabilities are being accommodated through Queen’s Student Accessibility Services Office.

Multiple appeals citing the same circumstances will be reviewed very closely. This review may include, with the permission of the student, consultation with the appropriate professionals involved to obtain more detailed information. In order for such an appeal to succeed, there must be convincing evidence that the circumstances that affected the student’s academic performance will be resolved within a reasonable timeline, or will be appropriately managed on an ongoing basis.

4.3 Language 

In accordance with Queen’s University Language Policy, examinations and assignments are to be submitted in English, except where a Faculty Board has approved an alternative practice or where a special agreement has been entered into between the Program and a student.

4.4 Acceptable Use of Information Technology Resources Policy

All members of the Queen’s community are bound by the Queen’s policy on the Acceptable Use of Information Technology (IT) Resources. The policy states:

The use of Queen's University information technology (IT) resources must be consistent with the academic mission of the University. These IT resources are provided to support the teaching, learning, research and administrative activities of the Queen's community. As a member or guest of the Queen's community, you may have access to valuable internal and external networks and resources, and Sensitive Information, and you are expected to use these resources in a responsible, ethical, and legal manner. Your actions should not adversely affect the ability of others to use these resources, or compromise the security and privacy of sensitive information.

4.4.1 Submission of Electronic Documents

Students may be required to submit assignments electronically. It is the responsibility of the student to ensure that all electronic submissions are corruption-free.

Any assignment that is detected to be carrying a corrupt file will be immediately destroyed, and the student must re-submit the assignment corruption-free. If the assignment is not re-submitted before the assignment deadline it will be marked “late.” 

4.5 Examinations

4.5.1 Access to Examinations

The term final examination paper refers to the final examination question paper in a course together with the graded answer paper written by the student. These documents, in accordance with the Senate Policy on Student Access to Final Examination Papers, must be retained by the professor or the School for a period of 12 months. Informal Access

Professors may informally review the final examination paper with a student who requests it and are encouraged to do so. However, access may not be granted before the final marks are released. Formal Access

A student may obtain access to their final exam as part of an appeal process. This may be supervised access to, or a copy of, the final examination paper. The student should contact the Program administration to arrange for formal access to their final exam. Changes to Examination Times

Requests for changes to an individual examination time must be made to the Program Director as soon as the student is aware of a conflict. Normally, such requests will only be granted if extenuating circumstances (beyond the student’s control) will prevent the student from writing the exam at the scheduled time.

The exam dates for the courses with exams will be posted well in advance of the date of the exam. The policies regarding exam locations and change of dates are set out below.

  1. At least one month in advance of the first exam date, students will receive a survey from the Program administration through an online survey setting out the upcoming exam locations. Each student must choose their site preference no later than two weeks in advance of the first scheduled exam date, and this will become the default location for all subsequent exams.
  2. Changes to the preferred exam location can be made up to two weeks prior to any subsequent exam by sending a request in writing to both the Program Manager and the Administrative Coordinator, Assignments and Exams at Queen’s. Students should understand that changes requested within two weeks of the exam may not be permitted.
  3. All requests for changes to exam dates must meet the following criteria:
    1. A written request for the change of date must be received by the Program Manager at Queen’s at least two weeks in advance of the exam; the request must clearly state the reason for the change.
    2. All requests must be approved by the Program administration in consultation with the course professor; this process may require supporting documentation.
    3. The student requesting the change of exam date must secure their own proctor and secure their own exam location and pay all associated costs. The student will be provided with a list of persons who qualify to be proctors for exams conducted by Queen’s.
    4. In extenuating circumstances, changes to exam dates may be considered if the criteria set out in 1 and 2 above are not met.

4.6 Queen's University Student Code of Conduct 

Queen’s University is dedicated to learning, intellectual inquiry, the dissemination and advancement of knowledge, personal and professional development, and good citizenship. All students are required to read and adhere to Queen’s University Student Code of Conduct.

Students are expected to adhere to and promote the University’s core values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect and personal responsibility in all aspects of University life, academic and non-academic. These core values are intended to inform and guide student conduct as they foster mutual respect for the dignity, property, rights and well-being of others.

As a member of the Queen’s community, every student accepts the University’s policies, rules and procedures and acknowledges the right of the University to set standards of conduct, as well as the right of the University and/or its Authorized Agent(s) to impose sanctions for conduct found to have violated those standards. 

4.6.1 Professionalism and Facilities Etiquette

All study and work spaces provided by Smith School of Business should be treated with respect and care. All students are expected to properly reserve space, use the facilities for the purposes for which they are intended, and to leave spaces clean, tidy, in the proper furniture configuration and with the room supplies.


Various types of academic decisions may be made by a course professor, Program Director, Academic Progress Committee, Academic Integrity Panel, Academic Appeals Committee and/or the University Student Appeal Board. 

The appeals process at Queen’s University is comprised of several levels of appeal by different appeal bodies. In accordance with the Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline, the decision system is based on the principle that "decisions should generally be made by those who are most familiar with the context”2

Appeals of academic decisions fall into four possible categories: appeals of grades (Section 5.1), appeals of other academic decisions (Section 5.2), appeals of academic standing and progression decisions (Section 5.3), and appeals of academic integrity decisions (Section 5.4).

Note that it is the student’s responsibility to clearly establish that grounds for an appeal exist as the basis for an appeal. Below the various decision-making bodies and their mandates are explained.

Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights, and Discipline, Introduction (Section A.2).

5.1 Appeals of Grades

Grades are determined by course professors. Appeals of grades in courses (including assignments, examination papers, and final grades) are first handled at the course professor level. 
Examination papers and course marks of students whose final grade in a course is marginally below a letter grade, and especially below a failing grade, are reviewed with special care by faculty members before such grades are assigned. Therefore it is unlikely that such a grade is incorrect or unfair to the student. However, if a student feels that a course grade or a portion of it has been unfairly assessed, they should first make an attempt to resolve the issue informally with the professor.

If the student feels that the issue remains unresolved, they should contact the Program Director who will initiate a formal grade review. A review of the assignment or examination shall be conducted by two examiners appointed by the Program Director or designate; one examiner shall be the original professor or grader, if available. The review shall involve a re‐reading of the final examination or deliverable(s) in the course and a review of the student’s course record. 

Requests for reconsideration of a course grade must be accompanied by payment of a fee of $100. This fee will be refunded to the student if, as a result of the review, a failing grade is raised to a pass or if a pass is raised by as much as five marks or to a higher letter grade. Note that it is the responsibility of the student to preserve all exercises, papers, reports, and other graded material for the course and to submit a copy of these documents with the request for review. The scanned copy of any graded assignment or material returned to a student shall be deemed to be the original document for the purposes of this section.
The decision of the examiner(s) is final, and there is no further appeal available.

5.2 Appeals of Other Academic Decisions 

The Program Director makes some decisions for students facing special circumstances in the Program. The student should request consideration as appropriate to the Program Director as soon as they are aware of a situation requiring such consideration. Examples of such decisions could include: changing a course registration from one elective to another, or deferring an exam. 

Appeals of decisions by the Program Director are made to the Academic Progress Committee. 

5.3 Appeals of Academic Standing and Progression Decisions 

Students are considered to be in Good Academic Standing unless they have violated one or more of the Academic Regulations of the Program. As noted, students who violate one or more of the Academic Regulations of the Program are normally required to withdraw from the Program. In such a case, the Program Director will normally inform the student in writing that, because of their violation of one or more of the Regulations, they are required to withdraw from the Program. 

Appeals of these decisions are made to the Academic Progress Committee.

5.4 Appeals of Academic Integrity Decisions 

Course professors will normally investigate and make decisions regarding possible violations of academic integrity in their courses in accordance with the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy and as set out in Section 4.1. 

Appeals of professors’ decisions regarding academic integrity are made to the Academic Integrity Panel. 

In cases where the Academic Integrity Panel is the initial decision-maker, appeals are made to the Academic Appeals Committee.

5.5 The Academic Appeals Committee of Faculty Board 

See Appendix A for the Academic Appeals Committee of Faculty Board Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure.

Smith School of Business

  1. Terms of Reference
  2. Jurisdiction
  3. Membership
  4. Rules of Procedure
  5. Records Management

Adopted by Faculty Board June 12, 2019

5.6 The University Student Appeal Board

Students wishing to appeal a decision by the Academic Appeals Committee must make their intention known to the University Student Appeal Board (USAB). The University Student Appeal Board is the final internal appeal body at Queen’s University. Its mandate is outlined in the Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline (SARD).
The decision of the USAB is final, and there is no further level of appeal.

5.6.1. Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights, and Discipline
All students should be familiar with their rights as established in the Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline

5.7 Appeals for the Renmin Delivered Courses

Appeals of academic decisions for courses led by Renmin Faculty are subject to the policies and procedures at Renmin University. Students should note that Queen’s has no jurisdiction, or ability to influence Renmin in these matters.


6.1 Educational Equity 

Through the Educational Equity Policy, Queen's University recognizes that the values of equity and diversity are vital to and in harmony with its educational mission and standards of excellence. It acknowledges that direct, indirect and systemic discrimination exist within our institutional structures, policies and practices and in our community. These take many forms and work to differentially advantage and disadvantage persons across social identities such as race, ethnicity, disability, gender identity, sexual orientation, faith and socioeconomic status, among other examples.

Queen's is committed to counteracting discrimination in this institution and developing a climate of educational equity that recognizes and respects the equal dignity and worth of all who seek to participate in the life, work and mission of the University. Such a climate is created and maintained by developing a university-wide commitment to and understanding of educational equity, supported by policies, programs, curricula, practices and traditions that facilitate individuals - and equity-seeking groups- free, safe, and full participation.

Any student who has concerns related to educational equity may contact the Program Director, the University Ombudsperson, and/or the Human Rights and Equity Office.

6.2 Accommodation for Special Needs/Disabilities

Queen’s Policy Concerning Students with Disabilities states:

Queen's University is committed to facilitating the integration of students with disabilities into the University community. While all students must satisfy the essential requirements for courses and programs, the administration, faculty, staff, and students at Queen's are expected to provide reasonable accommodation to students with disabilities. Reasonable accommodation may require members of the University community to exercise creativity and flexibility in responding to the needs of students with disabilities while maintaining academic standards.

This policy acknowledges that fundamental to the academic and personal success of students is their responsibility both to demonstrate self-reliance and to identify needs requiring accommodation.

It is the responsibility of students in need of accommodation for a disability or other special need to contact Queen’s Student Accessibility Services to register for formal accommodations. In partnership with Student Accessibility Services, the Program will work to ensure that appropriate modifications or accommodations are made in accordance with Queen’s Policy on Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities and Queen’s Academic Accommodations for Students with Disabilities Procedure.

6.3 Academic Advising 

Students should contact the Program administration with questions about degree requirements, electives or other academic matters as appropriate.

6.4 Personal Counselling 

Queen’s University provides personal counselling services through Student Wellness Services. Student Wellness Services supports the personal, academic, and social development of students at Queen's University by providing a range of programs and services.

Students may also contact the Program Director to discuss supports available through Smith School of Business.

6.5 The University Ombudsperson 

Queen’s University is committed to the just, fair and equitable treatment of each and every member of the University community. In keeping with this commitment, the Office of the University Ombudsmperson at Queen’s University provides an independent, impartial and confidential office through which members of the University community may pursue the just, fair and equitable resolution of university-related concerns within its jurisdiction.

Among other duties, the Office of the University Ombudsman: receives, assesses, and facilitates the informal resolution of concerns and complaints; provides confidential and independent advice and support to members of the University community; acts as a liaison between individuals and/or groups at all levels serving as a communicator or informal conciliator; and mediates the resolution of complaints.

Any student who finds themselves in an appeal situation is strongly advised to contact the University Ombudsman for advice, assistance and support.


7.1 The Faculty Board of Smith School of Business

In May 1963, the Faculty Board of Smith School of Business was established by the Board of Trustees of the University on the Senate's recommendation, to provide an appropriate body for the regulation of the conduct of the School's academic programs.

The Faculty Board of Smith School of Business (SSB) is constituted as follows: the Principal (ex officio), the Dean and Associate Dean(s) of Smith School of Business, all regular faculty of SSB, all adjunct academic staff of SSB, all other persons, who are currently teaching or whose appointment is in force at the date of the meeting or those in other faculties giving required courses for any of the degree programs in SSB; one senior administrative officer from each of the major teaching programs (eg., BCom, Queen's MBA, Exec MBA, AMBA, Exec MBA Americas, Master of Management, MSc/PhD); a representative of all non-academic, non-teaching staff of Smith School of Business (to be elected by this group); President of the Commerce Society, two BCom student Senators, two other representatives from the Commerce Society, one student representative from the Queen's MBA program, one student representative from the Executive MBA Programs, one representative from the AMBA Program, one representative from the Exec MBA Americas Program, one student representative from the Master of Management Programs, one representative from the MSc Program, one from the PhD Program.

7.1.1 Review of Record by Faculty Board
The Faculty Board of the School of Business reserves the right to review the record of any student. The Faculty Board will recommend to the Senate the granting of the Degree, after all courses have been completed in accordance with the provisions specified in this Calendar.

7.2 Student Names

As the University is committed to the integrity of its student records, each student is required to provide either on application for admission or on personal data forms required for registration, their complete, legal name. Any requests to change a name, by means of alteration, deletion, substitution or addition must be accompanied by appropriate supporting documentation in accordance with the University Policy on Student Names.

7.3 Confidentiality

The Program acknowledges that confidentiality is a serious and important issue for students. Students may be submitting and developing confidential business plans and strategies, and these submissions are carefully protected. All staff sign confidentiality agreements. These confidentiality agreements are kept on file in the Program office, and students may request a copy at any time.

Class discussions will frequently include company-specific examples. In order to encourage open class discussions, all in-class discussions should be held in the strictest confidence by students and professors, and must not be discussed outside of class. Recorded classes are for the purpose of helping students in their studies and must not be copied, shared or distributed in any way. 

7.3.1 Sharing of Student Data
During the course of the program, the Program may share the names of persons enrolled in the GDA program with the institutes of the professional accounting bodies in order to facilitate the record keeping on the part of those professional bodies. This is intended to prevent those students taking the GDA program from having their qualifications judged on a course by course basis, which would not be appropriate given the accreditation status of the Smith GDA program. Should a candidate choose not to have this information shared with the professional accounting bodies, the Program Manager must be informed in writing (email is acceptable) within two weeks of the beginning of the Program. Likewise, students enrolled in the GDA Program grant the institutes of the professional accounting bodies permission to share their results on the professional exams with Smith School of Business.

7.4 Conflict of Interest

Fairness or objectivity may be compromised if academic evaluation is conducted, even in part, by someone to whom there is a close personal or professional tie (for example, a family member or consulting relationship). Where such a tie does exist between student and instructor, the parties involved have the responsibility to declare a potential conflict of interest, normally to the Program Director who will assist, without prejudice, in arranging evaluation by alternative means.

Conflicts of interest may also arise with the sharing of confidential company information on projects, as well as within teams. When this occurs, the parties involved must declare the potential conflict to the Program Director who will make, without prejudice, alternative arrangements

7.5 Withdrawal and Re-Admission

A student who withdraws from the Program, whether voluntarily or as a result of a requirement to withdraw, is subsequently no longer considered to be an enrolled student of Queen's University. There is no opportunity for students to take a leave of absence from the Program, except in extraordinary circumstances.

7.5.1 Program Fees and Withdrawals

The funding model for Smith School of Business Professional Graduate Programs is distinct from MSc and PhD programs at Smith, the latter designated part of the School of Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs. Therefore, the Completion/Withdrawal Schedule for School of Graduate Studies and Postdoctoral Affairs does not apply to students registered in Smith School of Business Professional Graduate Programs. If you choose to withdraw from a Professional Graduate Program, you may be eligible for a refund.

Depending on the date of withdrawal and the fees already paid, a participant who withdraws from the Program may be eligible for a refund of fees as follows:

  1. Program fees are due in full for all completed courses
  2. For partially completed courses, 50% of the course fee is due up to and including half-way point of the course.  After the half-way point of the course, the fee will be prorated based on the length of time the participant is enrolled in the course.
  3. The fee for the projects will be prorated based on the credits earned in non-project courses by the participant at the time of withdrawal.
  4. There will be no refund of in-residence fees incurred.
  5. There will be no refund of advisor fees incurred for individual projects.
  6. For refund calculation purposes the fee per course credit is calculated by the Finance Office.  The refund per course is adjusted according to the credit weight of the particular course taken.

Students with a Queen’s or Smith scholarship will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Please contact Queen's Smith School of Business directly for more information.

7.5.2 Re-admission

Former students may apply for re-admission. It is important to note that prior admission to the Program is not a guarantee of future re-admission. To initiate an application for re-admission, former students must submit all documents and materials required by the admissions procedures in place at the time of their application for re-admission.

In some cases, a student who has withdrawn will be re-admitted on Academic Probation. Students who withdraw while on Academic Probation will continue on Probation if they are re-admitted to the Program.  Students who have been required to withdraw from the Program will not normally be re-admitted to the Program.

7.6 Financial Policy

Students should consult the Program website or Director for the fee schedule and late payment policies. 

7.6.1 Outstanding Debts

Queen’s University Senate Policy on Student Debtors provides that:

Any student with an overdue debt with the University will not be permitted to register or receive examination results, official transcripts or marks reports until the outstanding account is settled in full or until an acceptable arrangement for settling the account is made. In no case will a diploma be released to a student with an outstanding debt with the University.

Students with outstanding debts may also be restricted from registering for, or attending, courses and Program residential sessions until all debts have been paid in full or an acceptable arrangement for the payment of debt has been reached.

Interest will be charged to the student account on any overdue amount. Interest is calculated on a compound basis. Account queries should be addressed to the Smith Finance Office at Queen's Smith School of Business.

7.7 Trademark and Copyright

Smith School of Business is the owner of its trademarks (logo, name, colours) and custom materials (workbooks, study guides, cases). Smith School of Business retains ownership of all trademarks and copyrights, and students may not duplicate or reproduce these trademarks and copyrights without specific written permission from the Dean of Smith School of Business and the Program Director. This is particularly important regarding the use of the logo, which may not be reproduced on clothing or other materials without the prior written consent of the Dean and the Program Director. The School assumes no responsibility for any costs incurred by students who proceed to use the School logo without receiving prior written permission. Persons who use the School trademark and copyrights without permission will be subject to legal action to block usage. 

7.8 Travel Insurance

Health insurance that covers international travel is necessary for all persons participating in international activities to protect them from significant financial problems while abroad and to ensure optimal emergency health care. It is your sole responsibility to ensure you have health insurance that covers international travel.


Smith School of Business
Master of Business Administration, Master of Management, and Graduate Diploma Programs

Adopted by Faculty Board September 12, 2017


First appeals of academic decisions are made to the Academic Progress Committee of the program in which the student is enrolled (i.e. the Undergraduate Academic Progress Committee or the MBA/MOM Academic Progress Committee). These committees are knowledgeable about the particular program, school, and university regulations, and have experience making student academic and progress decisions.

First appeals of instructors’ decisions regarding academic integrity are normally made to the Academic Integrity Panel (AIP). However, in the event that the AIP is the original decision-maker3, the first appeal of the AIP decision is to the Academic Appeals Committee.

The decision responsibilities set out above are in accordance with the Senate's Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline, which recognizes that "decisions should generally be made by those who are most familiar with the context”4.

The Academic Appeals Committee (AAC) is established by the Smith School of Business and created by Faculty Board to:

  1. Review, hear, and dispose of student academic appeals from decisions of Academic Progress Committees regarding academic matters and student progress, including but not limited to academic probation, requirements to withdraw, and other related decisions;
  2. Review, hear, and dispose of student appeals from decisions of the Academic Integrity Panel regarding:
    1. The Finding of Departure from Academic Integrity;
    2. The sanction(s) resulting from a Finding of Departure from Academic Integrity; or
    3. Finding and sanction if both issues are raised on appeal.
  3. Make recommendations to Academic Progress Committees, Program Administration, or the Academic Integrity Panel regarding matters of policy arising from AAC discussions and hearings; and
  4. Serve as the final body of academic appeal in the Smith School of Business.

3 For a description of the circumstances in which the Academic Integrity Panel might be the original decision maker, see the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy, Section 3.2(b)
Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights, and Discipline, Introduction.


The AAC has jurisdiction over all academic matters related to appeals involving students registered in the Smith School of Business, except students in the MSc and PhD programs who are governed by the School of Graduate Studies General Regulations.

Normally, the AAC shall serve as a true appeal board, which reviews the decision of the previous decision- making body based on the same information available to the previous body at the time the decision was made.

In this context, the AAC shall consider appeals alleging:

  1. A failure by the relevant decision-making body to follow applicable Smith School of Business rules or regulations;
  2. A breach of procedural fairness;
  3. A violation of University policies;
  4. The decision of the previous decision-making body was not reasonable5.

In cases where the original decision was made by the Academic Integrity Panel, the AAC shall conduct a hearing de novo, which is a new hearing of the matter conducted as though the original hearing had not taken place6

6The Senate Policy on Student Appeals Rights and Discipline, in commentary to Section 16, defines ‘reasonable’ as follows: “[A] decision that is grounded in logic…. [A] reasonable decision is one that is supported by logical inferences from accepted premises and facts.” The commentary further notes that “[i]f there is more than one conclusion that may be reasonably drawn from the same premises and facts, the choice of one conclusion over another does not make the decision unreasonable.” This is the sense in which “reasonable” is used here.

7 Section 4.4 of the Senate Policy on Academic Integrity Procedures, stipulates that “The first appeal of an academic integrity decision shall always be a hearing de novo.” A hearing de novo means a new and complete consideration of all available evidence, followed by the issuance of a new decision.


The MBA/MOM Academic Progress Committee is comprised of a total of seven voting members, all of whom are knowledgeable about the MBA, MOM and GD programs. APC members are faculty members of Smith School of Business and are appointed by the Associate Dean, Faculty. Two faculty members are appointed Co-Chairs.

Members normally hold a term of three years (preferably in staggered terms). New members assume their duties on July 1 of each year.

Hearing Panels of the MBA/MOM APC shall be appointed by the Co-Chair to hear individual student appeals. Hearing Panels shall normally consist of a minimum of three APC members, including one CoChair, and a maximum of six APC members, based on availability and any conflict of interest issues.

The Co-Chairs of the APC will be faculty members. Another member of the APC may be delegated the role of Co-Chair if the appointed Co-Chairs are unable to participate in a particular case

Normally, one Co-Chair will act as Chair of a Hearing Panel. The Co-Chair will:

i. appoint a Hearing Panel;
ii. serve as the Chair of a Hearing Panel, unless that role is delegated as above;
iii. convene hearings;
iv. preside over hearings of the MBA/MOM APC Panel according to the Rules of Procedure5 and give procedural direction for the conduct of individual cases to the extent that a procedural issue is not dealt with in the Rules of Procedure;
v. participate in the Hearing Panel deliberations and decision-making;
vi. guide the APC in the uniform and consistent application of the regulations and relevant policies within and across the MBA/MOM/GD programs;
vii. ensure hearings are conducted fairly and with due process; and
viii. draft and finalize the decision of the Hearing Panel consistent with the findings and reasons of the APC members and communicate the Panel’s Decision to the parties involved.


Smith School of Business
Master of Business Administration, Master of Management, and Graduate Diploma Programs

Adopted by Faculty Board September 12, 2017


The following rules apply to proceedings before an APC Hearing ("Panel"):

The Panel will adhere to the relevant program Academic Regulations as well as policies and procedures of the School and Queen’s University.

To protect the privacy and confidentiality of students, Panel meetings and Hearings are closed to the public.
Hearings are not normally recorded, unless a special request is made by the appellant in advance of the Hearing. In such a case, the Chair of the Panel (“Chair”) will decide whether to record the Hearing. The Chair may also wish to record a Hearing, and will inform the parties of the intention to do so in advance of the Hearing. Any transcripts of a Hearing will be provided to either party upon request, in which case a copy will also be provided to the other party. Transcripts must be treated as confidential. There will be no recording of the Panel’s deliberations. Participants may take their own notes during the Hearing. All such notes are transitory1 and are not considered to be University Records. 

In cases where an APC member has, or may be reasonably perceived to have, a conflict of interest with respect to a specific case, that individual may not serve on the APC Panel in connection with that case2.

1.4 No member will participate in the deliberations or final Decision of the Panel unless present for the entire Appeal Hearing 

As needed, the Chair has the power to issue such supplementary rules of procedure as may be necessary to govern the conduct of an Appeal.

1See the Queen’s University Policy on Transitory Records: Transitory Records are created or received by the University in the course of conducting its activities, but have no ongoing operational, informational, evidential or historical value. Usually transitory records have an immediate or short-term value, pertaining to an immediate task or minor transaction. They can exist in any format or medium. An example is an e-mail confirming attendance at a meeting.
2 Normally, having taught the appellant in a class that is neither directly the subject of the appeal nor indirectly the subject of the appeal is not considered a conflict of interest and does not require that the APC member recuse themselves. A conflict of interest may be present if: there is a relationship between the APC member and the student (such as a consulting or family relationship); the APC member has an interest in the outcome of the decision; the APC member has pre-judged the case; the APC member was involved in an earlier stage of decision-making. In cases where a conflict is unclear, the remaining members of the APC will determine if the member should be recused.

1.6 The Panel has no power to compel any person to attend a hearing 
The Chair may request the participation of parties and witnesses, but it has no power to compel participation.


A student wishing to appeal an academic decision made at the Program level has a right to a Hearing before an APC Hearing Panel. In such a case, the student has seven (7) days following the date of the Program’s decision to provide the APC Co-Chair with written confirmation that they wish to appeal the Program’s decision (“Notice of Appeal”).

2.1 Written Submissions6
After indicating their intention to appeal, the student will have a further 14 days following the date on their Notice of Appeal to provide the APC Co-Chair with a full written Submission. 

i. The Student’s Submission: The student’s Submission should outline their situation, include any and all pertinent evidence, a list of any witnesses the student intends to bring to the Appeal Hearing, and the student’s desired remedy for the situation.
ii. The Director’s Submission: The Co-Chair of the APC will share the Student’s Submission with the Program Director, who will have seven (7) days following receipt of the Student’s Submission to respond with their own written Submission if they wish. The Program Director’s Submission should include the reasons for their decision, any pertinent evidence, and a list of any witnesses they intend to bring to the Appeal Hearing. 
iii. The Student’s Response: The Program Director’s Submission will be shared with the student who will have seven (7) days following receipt of the Director’s Submission to submit a final written Statement to the APC Co-Chair if they wish. 

2.2 The Proceeding
Following the receipt of all written Submissions, the Co-Chair shall appoint the members of the Hearing Panel7 and schedule the Appeal Hearing. The student shall be given sufficient notice of the date, time and location of the Hearing, as well as the names of all participants, and their role, in at the Hearing. The Hearing will be conducted in an appropriate space. 
i. The student has the right to appear in-person, electronically, or to opt not to appear at the Hearing. 
ii. A Hearing may proceed and a decision made without additional input from the student in cases where the student opts not to appear at their Hearing.
iii. The student has the right to representation, including a Dispute Resolution Advisor from the Ombudsman’s Office and/or legal counsel and/or other agent (all at the student’s own expense) at the Appeal Hearing. The student may make oral submissions or their representative may make submissions on their behalf. The student must inform the Chair of the name and role of any representatives in advance of the Hearing.
iv. Normally the Program Director or their delegate will attend the Hearing and make oral submissions. The Program Director may also bring representation who may make submissions on their behalf. 
v. Other witnesses will be asked to participate in the Hearing as deemed necessary by the Chair. Witnesses are individuals who have first-hand knowledge of the matters at issue in the Appeal Hearing; the evidence of ‘character’ witnesses will not normally be received by the Panel. Each party shall have an opportunity to question witnesses. The Chair can limit questioning of a witness if the Chair believes the questioning is irrelevant, abusive or otherwise inappropriate. 
vi. The Chair shall determine what evidence is admitted as part of the Hearing. The Chair shall normally apply a relevance approach8 to such determinations. The Chair has the right to exclude evidence that is deemed irrelevant, repetitive or otherwise inappropriate.
vii.  If, during the course of the Hearing, the Chair decides that more information is required in order to clarify a matter, the Chair may adjourn the Hearing to permit the relevant parties to bring forward such information or facts or to permit the Panel to obtain such information.
viii. The Chair may decide to adjourn the Hearing at the request of a party if the Chair believes that a party may be unfairly prejudiced should the Hearing proceed.
ix. The Panel has the right to seek confirmation and/or verification of any evidence, claims, or submissions made by any participants in the Hearing; should it be determined that false information was provided to the Panel, the matter may be investigated under the Smith School of Business Academic Integrity Policy.

6Note that in complex cases, additional time may be required. The Co-Chair has the power to make exceptions to the stated timeframes as appropriate based on the complexity of the case. Parties must make requests for additional time to the Co-Chair as soon as they determine the need for additional time.
7Hearing Panels shall normally consist of a minimum of three APC members and a maximum of all APC members based on availability and any conflict of interest issues.


After hearing all evidence, the AAC will deliberate in camera.  The deliberations of the AAC are confidential.

Following deliberations, the Panel may:
i. Dismiss the appeal and uphold the previous decision. In the case that the student be required to withdraw, a formal letter advising the student of the requirement to withdraw will be issued; or,
ii. Allow the appeal and grant the remedy requested by the student; or,
iii. Allow the Appeal in part and modify the Program’s original decision, and impose an appropriate sanction. This may include:

  • Imposing specific conditions under which the student will be permitted to continue in the Program and/or any requirements the student must meet, including the timelines within which such conditions and/or requirements must be met;
  • Requiring the student to:
    • Complete additional work;
    • Repeat an exam, assignment, or course;
    • Achieve a minimum grade(s);
    • Provide evidence of fitness to continue in the Program;
    • Placing the student on Academic Probation until the student satisfies all conditions and/or requirements within the timeline(s) set by the AAC.

iv. Impose other terms and/or conditions as may be appropriate for the specific situation.

The Panel may not award financial compensation to a student. The Panel’s Decision shall be communicated to the student within seven (7) days, or within a reasonable time as demanded by the complexity of the case, via a Decision Letter from the Panel Chair. The Decision Letter will include the reasons for the Decision, information about the next level of appeal, to whom to address an appeal, and information about the availability of the support of the Office of the University Ombudsman. 

The Panel’s Decision Letter shall be the official record of the Appeal. The Decision Letter will include the effective date of any actions to be taken by the Program (see section 3). 


In accordance with the Senate Policy on Student Appeals, Rights and Discipline, section 20, the student is normally entitled to exhaust all levels of appeal before sanctions are applied, except in the rare case where it is determined that the interests of third parties may be prejudiced by the continued enrolment of the student in a course or program. In such a case, the AAC shall determine whether the student may continue in their Program until appeal processes are exhausted. If the student is permitted to continue, the AAC shall determine under what conditions the student may do so, having regard for the need to protect the interests of the third party/parties. The AAC shall address the effective date of any actions and/or sanctions in the Decision Letter.


Appeal Records consist of all documents filed by the parties, the recording, if any, of the Appeal Hearing(s), the transcript, if any, of the recording, and the Decision Letter issued by the Panel.

The APC Co-Chair or delegate is responsible for collecting and distributing Appeal Records. The Co-Chair shall handle such records in a secure manner which protects the confidentiality of the documents.

Following an Appeal Hearing and issuance of the Decision Letter, the Panel Chair shall collect the files and any notes made during the Hearing by Panel members. All such notes are transitory and are not considered to be University Records. They form no part of the Appeal Record and shall be destroyed immediately following the issuance of the Panel’s Decision. 

Once the Panel renders its decision:
i. The Decision Letter is the official record of the Decision, a copy of which shall be kept by the APC
Co-Chair, the Program Director and in the Dean’s Office.
ii. Original Appeal Records are to be kept by the APC Co-Chair for one (1) year following the date
on which the student has exhausted all levels of appeal at the University, or, for one (1) year
following the expiry of the deadline for the student to pursue an appeal, whichever occurs first.
iii. Transitory records may be destroyed
Appeals of these decisions are made to the Academic Appeals Committee.