Appeals and Complaints

Introduction and General Information

The purpose of this policy is to ensure that participants undergoing the Recognising Teaching Excellence Fellowship application process receive fair and equitable treatment under the scheme. Its specific aims are to:

• identify and address potential unfairness or error in the recognition process.
• provide redress for any participant found to have been treated unfairly or inappropriately.
• support the ongoing quality assurance and continuous improvement of the Recognising Teaching Excellence Fellowship application process

Please note: As the Recognising Teaching Excellence Fellowship application process is not a validated academic programme and is, in effect, a process for the verification of professional practice, you are not classified as a student and therefore neither the University student academic appeals process nor the student complaints process are appropriate routes.

We are committed to providing high quality services to all eligible staff. We aim to provide a supportive environment and to be responsive to concerns when they are raised. However, we are a small team and we recognise that concerns may arise from time to time about support or administrative provision or with regard to the operation of our decision-making processes. We are dedicated to continuous improvement and want to learn from such concerns arising. We encourage you, therefore, to raise any problems or issues with us as soon as possible so we have an opportunity to understand where we might improve our offer and try to resolve it with you. We take seriously all concerns and issues raised with us and aim to deal with them in a timely, fair and consistent way. You will not be disadvantaged as a result of raising an issue with us.

All information submitted in relation to issues raised or complaints or appeals will be dealt with confidentially and will only be disclosed to those parties involved in resolving the concern, or as is necessary to progress the complaint.

Depending on the nature of the concern you may wish to proceed with either an Appeal or a Complaint.

Generally speaking, if you wish to report personal dissatisfaction about any of our actions, then you should be considering using the Complaints Process.

If you are unhappy with the processes of decision-making, any procedural issues connected with the scheme or the awarding process, which have resulted in specific disadvantage then you should be using the Appeals Process. Please note, however, that simple disagreement with the academic judgement cannot in itself constitute grounds for appeal.

Please note that applicants are entirely responsible for the content of their submissions and Panel decisions can only be reviewed on the grounds of incorrect or irregular application of the published decision-making procedures which materially affected your submission. For example:

• evidence of decision-making which was not in accordance with the Advance HE Accreditation Policy.
• administrative failures which prevented your submission being properly considered.
• evidence of factually incorrect or irregular provision of advice or guidance from cohort leads which materially affected your submission.

Early Resolution

Early resolution is the opportunity to address your concerns with appropriate University staff without needing to enter into more formal procedures. Most concerns and issues are straightforward and can be resolved very quickly. We are keen to address concerns at the time they arise preferably with the member of staff most directly involved with the concern you have. This is likely to be one of the following, all of whom welcome your feedback:

• Cohort leads
• Review Panel Chair (Senior Reviewer)
• Recognising Teaching Excellence administrators

If you are not sure who to speak to, or you do not feel able to approach the person most directly involved, you can seek confidential advice regarding this from any of the people listed above or email recognitionofteaching@shu.ac.uk

Our commitment is that your concern will be dealt with promptly, sympathetically and with respect for privacy and confidentiality. You will receive a response through personal contact, usually via email. In most cases your concern will be resolved through this process.

Sometimes the resolution you want might not be feasible or appropriate, or we may not be able to make changes straight away. Where you feel your concern has not been resolved, you may wish to move to Formal Resolution stage.

Formal Resolution

Appealing

Appeals are only available on the basis of the bullets above in the introduction. Appeals cannot be on the basis of disagreeing with the academic judgement alone. If you feel you have grounds for an appeal on one of those points and have unsucessfully been able to address your concerns using early resolution, then please complete the Fellowship Appeal form (DOCX, 39.9KB).

All appeals will be reviewed initially by the head of the Fellowship scheme at Sheffield Hallam. Where they have concerns around their own ability to be impartial they will ask someone else with suitable knowledge to investigate the appeal. 

The person investigating the appeal will review the appeal form and optionally meet with you about your appeal to discuss it. The investigator will scrutinise relevant panel records and documents and discuss the case with relevant staff involved in the scheme. The investigator will send a written report to an Appeals Panel.

The Appeals Panel will be chaired by the Executive Director for Student Success or nominee. The Panel will normally consist of two other members of senior academic or professional services staff with either Senior or Principal Fellow. The Panel will not include in its decision-making process, any member of staff from your College or Directorate or anyone else who has had any relevant prior involvement in the decision against which you are appealing. However, the Fellowship Scheme lead will attend the Panel in an advisory capacity.

The Appeals Panel will consider the evidence and decide whether to accept or decline your appeal. All efforts will be taken to reach a unanimous decision, but a majority decision is also acceptable. The Chair will write to you explaining the panel’s decision and what will happen next.

If your appeal is accepted, their findings will be sent to the Standardisation Panel for consideration. It will be asked to review these findings and any relevant new information or evidence. This review will take place as soon as possible and the Chair of the Standardisation Panel will write to you with the outcome of this review including any recommendations for action.

It is not within the remit of the Appeal Panel nor the Standardisation Panel itself to alter the original decision of the Review Panel as a result of an appeal being accepted. However, depending on the findings of the appeal panel, the Standardisation Panel may recommend that your original submission should be reviewed by a different Review Panel where a different decision could be made. The members of this Review Panel will not be made aware that your submission has been the subject of an Appeal.

If your appeal is declined, you will be informed of this outcome and the reasons for this decision. This will complete the Appeals process and no further right of appeal can be submitted.

Personal Complaints

If you have a complaint about the conduct of a member of staff involved in the Fellowship process, this should be addressed using the standard HROD Problem Resolution Framework.