coursework policy usyd

University of Sydney Handbooks - 2020 Archive

The university of sydney - sydney law school handbook 2020.

• Law Handbook
• University Home
• Bachelor of Laws
• Combined Laws
• Compulsory table
• Electives Part 1 table
• Electives Part 2 Jurisprudence table
• Juris Doctor
• Master of Laws
• Master of Administrative Law and Policy
• Master of Business Law
• Master of Criminology
• Master of Environmental Law
• Master of Health Law
• Master of International Law
• Master of Jurisprudence
• Master of Labour Law and Relations
• Master of Taxation
• Doctor of Juridical Studies
• Master of Criminology (Research)
• Master of Laws (Research)
• Learning outcomes
• Bachelor of Arts / Bachelor of Laws
• Bachelor of Commerce / Bachelor of Laws
• Bachelor of Economics / Bachelor of Laws
• Bachelor of Engineering Honours / Bachelor of Laws
• Bachelor of Science / Bachelor of Laws
• Compulsory descriptions
• Electives Part 1 descriptions
• Electives Part 2 Jurisprudence descriptions

Bachelor of Commerce and Bachelor of Laws

Course resolutions, 1 course codes.

2 Attendance pattern

4 cross faculty management, 5 admission to candidature, 6 requirements for award, 8 progression rules, 9 requirements for award with honours, 10 award of the degrees.

11 Cross-institutional study

12 international mobility, 13 course transfer, 14 credit for previous study, 15 transitional provisions.

© 2002-2020 The University of Sydney. Last Updated:  15-Nov-2019

ABN:  15 211 513 464. CRICOS Number:  00026A. Phone:  +61 2 9351 2222.

Authorised by:  Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education).

Contact the University | Jobs | Library | Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | Accessibility

Accessibility Tools

NEED HELP? CONTACT A CASEWORKER Caseworker Contact Form OR CONTACT THE SRC LEGAL SERVICE SRC Legal Service

• Academic Appeals

In this section

• Academic Honesty & Integrity
• Discontine Not Fail (DC)
• Special Consideration
• Student Misconduct
• Accommodation Guide
• Centrelink Payments for Students
• Effect of Income on payments
• Effect of Parental Income on Payments
• Effect of Relationships on payments
• Effect of Savings on payments
• Independence & Centrelink
• English Language Resources
• International Student Work Rights
• Other resources for International students
• Translated information
• Health Care Card
• Help with tax
• Student Guide to Living on Little Money
• Exclusion Appeal
• Show Good Cause
• Video: How to cope with workload
• Video: What does the SRC do?
• Video: What is Domestic Violence
• SRC Legal Service Form

Making an Academic Appeal

There are many different types of academic appeals. Appeals should be started within 15 working days of an academic decision or result. Late appeals might not be considered. Clause 1.5 of the Appeals Rule defines the types of decisions that can be appealed under this rule. These include:

• a mark for an essay, exam, or overall mark for a unit of study;
• a fail grade or removal from a placement ;
• a finding of plagiarism or academic dishonesty;
• a decline of a special consideration or special arrangements application;
• a decline of credit for previous study or work application;
• conditions or restrictions from a Show Good Cause outcome; and
• a decision not to re-admit you following (four semesters of) exclusion from your award course.

If you are unhappy with the course delivery, teaching or treatment you received, rather than an academic decision, you may find the University’s complaints process a more appropriate avenue to raise your concerns:  sydney.edu.au/student_affairs/complaints/

Appealing A Mark

You have the right under Freedom of Information, and Section 9 (5) of the  Assessment Procedures 2011 , to a breakdown of your marks, and to see your assessments and any written comments about your work. Examination scripts must be retained by the Uni for six months.

The Appeal Process (Assessment Mark)

• Informal resolution with the original decision-maker

You can only appeal marks that were given no more than 15 working days ago. Start by looking at the breakdown of the final mark. Check what the course outline says about the assessment and read the marking criteria. If it was an assessment that you submitted, carefully read the marker’s comments. If it was an exam, review the paper with the original decision maker. Get an understanding of where you received fewer marks than you were expecting. You do not have the right to an automatic re-mark of your assessment, but you can ask the subject coordinator to consider it. Email the original decision maker outlining all the areas you believe were not correctly marked. Be as specific as possible and align your comments to the marking criteria.

If you believe your ability to complete an assessment was impacted by personal illness, injury, or misadventure, you need to apply for special consideration within 3 working days of the assessment deadline. Your subject coordinator does not have to take these circumstances into account if you did not apply for special consideration or raise these issues until after your mark was released. Late applications for special consideration require compelling documentation that outlines how you were impacted at the time of the assessment and any reasons your circumstances prevented you from submitting an application on time.

You should receive a response within 10 working days, that addresses your concerns; provides a clear explanation of the reasons for the decision; acknowledges whether the academic decision is confirmed or amended; explains the next appeal step; and gives you a link to the Appeals Rule .

• Application for review to the Faculty/School (Assessment mark)

If you are still dissatisfied with the decision after attempting an informal resolution, you have the right to lodge an “application for review”. Outline where the original marker did not correctly consider your explanation for why you should receive more marks. Focus on the way the original marker made this decision, rather than their academic opinion. If the decision maker provided comments for why they made that decision, address each one in your appeal. These appeals are usually decided by the Associate Dean. You have 20 working days from the informal resolution response to submit this appeal, and you should receive a decision or an update on when it is likely to be provided, within 15 working days. All applications for review should be submitted online .

• Appeal to the Student Appeals Body (Assessment mark)

If you are not happy with the outcome of your “application for review”, the final level of appeal is to the Student Appeals Body (SAB). You have 15 working days from the date of the Faculty/School decision to submit an appeal to the SAB. The SAB cannot consider appeals based on merit, only the process on which the academic decision was made. You will need to identify areas of procedural unfairness or breaches of policy. This may include faults in the faculty’s decision, or that the decision maker did not fully consider all the information provided to them. If the decision maker provided comments for why they made that decision, address each one in your appeal. SAB appeals should be submitted online .

Appealing A Placement Grade Or Removal

You have the right under Freedom of Information, and Section 9 (5) of the  Assessment Procedures 2011 , to see reports written about your performance in the placement.

The Appeal Process (Placement)

The three stages for appealing a grade or outcome of a placement are the same as the processes for appealing a mark. Review any reports from your placement supervisor and note any areas of concern. Sometimes supervisors are not able to be present while you complete tasks. If one of the areas you lost marks in was where your supervisor was not present, ask how they were able to make an assessment on your performance. Keep in mind that positive feedback in between reports might just be encouragement rather than an indication of your performance. Consider if there were any specific incidents that might have been cause for concern for your supervisor or the Faculty. Email the subject coordinator explaining why you think the Faculty’s decision was incorrect. The subject coordinator might want to meet with you instead of communicating through email. You can bring a family member or friend to this meeting, to provide you with moral support. That person cannot act as an advocate, and usually cannot speak during the meeting. Before the meeting write yourself a rough guide to refer to in the meeting, explaining each of the areas you think you were not correctly marked. You can choose whether you want to give your rough guide to the Faculty at the end of the meeting. Answer any questions as honestly as possible.

If an incident that happened on placement leads to a misconduct allegation, consider the advice in the SRC’s Student Misconduct leaflet , and consult an SRC Caseworker for further advice.

Appealing A Plagiarism Or Misconduct Allegation Outcome

Many students confuse academic honesty allegations with misconduct allegations. If your allegation letter is from your faculty and says you have potentially breached the  Academic Honesty in Coursework Policy , it is not a misconduct allegation, and you should read the SRC’s guide to Academic Honesty & Integrity . It also contains information on appealing the outcome. If your letter is from the Registrar or the Student Affairs Unit, and says you have potentially breached the  Student Discipline Rule , you should read the SRC’s guide to Student Misconduct .

Appealing A Decline Of Special Consideration Or Special Arrangements

To appeal a decline of special consideration or special arrangements read the SRC’s guide to Special Consideration .

Appealing A Decline Of Discontinue Not To Count As Fail (DC) Under Special Circumstances

To appeal a decline of a DC application read the SRC’s guide to Discontinue Not Fail .

Appealing A Decline Of Credit For Previous Study Or Work Application

You have 15 working days to outline your concerns and submit a request for informal resolution that will be considered by the relevant team in Student Administrative Services (SAS). Explain how your study or work experience used a structured program to achieve the graduate qualities and learning outcomes relevant to your degree.

Graduate qualities should be embedded in the curriculum and include:

• critical thinking and problem solving;
• oral and written communication;
• information and digital literacy;
• inventiveness;
• cultural competence;
• interdisciplinary effectiveness;
• an integrated professional, ethical and personal identity; and

Learning outcomes must be assessed in the curriculum and should specify how your previous study or work aligns with the credit you seek. Provide as much information as you can e.g., past unit outlines, course materials etc and compare to specific Usyd units or levels of study you believe these are equivalent to.

If your informal resolution is not successful you have 20 working days to apply for a review by the Academic Panel. Outline where the SAS has not correctly considered your submission, addressing any specific comments they made in the outcome. If you are not happy with the outcome of your “application for review”, the final level of appeal is to the Student Appeals Body (SAB). You have 15 working days from the date of the Faculty/School decision to submit an appeal to the SAB. The SAB cannot consider appeals based on merit, only the process on which the academic decision was made. You will need to identify areas of procedural unfairness or breaches of policy. This may include faults in the formal appeal outcome, or that the decision maker did not fully consider all the information provided to them. If the decision maker provided comments for why they made that decision, address each one in your appeal.

Appealing Conditions Or Restrictions From A Show Good Cause Outcome

If the Faculty decides that you have not shown good cause, they can decide to exclude you. Another outcome is to allow you to re-enrol with conditions. These include compelling you to pass a specific subject, or meet with a member of Faculty, or enrol in a limited number of credit points for a semester.

To appeal an exclusion, follow the SRC’s guide to Exclusion Appeals . To appeal the conditions for re-enrolment apply for a review to the Faculty/School. Explain how the solutions you outlined in your Show Good Cause letter will ensure that you pass all of your subjects without having to following the Faculty’s conditions. It can be difficult to successfully appeal conditions of re-enrolment, so we encourage you to talk to an SRC Caseworker for advice. You have 20 working days to submit this request.

If you are not happy with the outcome of your “application for review”, the final level of appeal is to the Student Appeals Body (SAB). You have 15 working days from the date of the Faculty/School decision to submit an appeal to the SAB. The SAB cannot consider appeals based on merit, only the process on which the academic decision was made. You will need to identify areas of procedural unfairness or breaches of policy. This may include faults in the formal appeal outcome, or that the decision maker did not fully consider all the information provided to them. If the decision maker provided comments for why they made that decision, address each one in your appeal.

Appealing A Decision Not To Re-Admit You Following (Four Semesters Of) Exclusion

If you have been excluded from your degree, you need to serve the minimum exclusion period of four semesters. Readmission is not automatic but can be gained by applying to the Associate Dean. If your application for readmission is not successful you can appeal to the Student Appeals Body (SAB). You have 15 working days from the date of the Faculty/School decision to submit an appeal to the SAB. The SAB cannot consider appeals based on merit, only the process on which the academic decision was made. You will need to identify areas of procedural unfairness or breaches of policy. This may include faults in the formal appeal outcome, or that the decision maker did not fully consider all the information provided to them. If the decision maker provided comments for why they made that decision, address each one in your appeal.

Things To Consider

Be clear about your appeal: Address each of the concerns of the previous decision makers. Avoid emotive language and focus on the facts. Working hard and then unexpectedly failing is not grounds for appeal. Nor is the potential inconvenience of not being successful in your request.

Know your desired outcome: Have a realistic idea of what outcome you want, for example, an extra mark for a particular section of an assessment, to enrol in 24 credit points in a semester, or to be given credit for a maths subject you completed at another uni last year.

Be informed: Familiarise yourself with relevant information such as course outlines and marking criteria, University policies and the appeals process.

Your Appeal Rights

According to the University’s Appeals Rule , applications for review and appeals will be handled in a “procedurally fair and reasonable manner” and have regard for timeliness; confidentiality; an absence of bias or conflicts of interest; and no victimisation.

University Policies

The most common policies related to assessment, special consideration, credit, and other academic processes are:

• University of Sydney (Student Academic Appeals) Rule 2021
• Assessment Procedures 2011
• Coursework Policy 2021
• University of Sydney (Coursework) Rule 2014

You might also check faculty resolutions, course resolutions or local provisions adopted by your faculty or school. SRC Caseworkers are familiar with university policies, procedures and processes and can advise on any policies or rules relevant to your circumstances.

If you have exhausted the appeals procedures within the University and feel that the University has still not followed its policies, or there is procedural unfairness, you can  lodge a complaint with the NSW Ombudsman

Need more help or advice?

If you need more advice about your specific situation, contact an SRC Caseworker by completing the contact form (below)

Caseworker Contact Form

This information does not constitute legal advice. Seek qualified professional advice before making decisions about educational, financial, migration or legal matters. This information can change from time to time. Check for the most up-to-date information.

Information updated on 26/07/22 (ACA)

Latest news

Read more about SRC activities

SRC Response to the University's statement on the historic 7th August SGM

Difficult Homelife? What are your options?

Dealing with Fines & Penalties

SRC Annual Elections 2024

Statement: usyd shuts down gaza solidarity encampment.

STUDENT GENERAL MEETING - 7 August

Gaza encampment statement on 2nd meeting with university management, gaza encampment statement on 1st meeting with university management.

USyd Palestine & Gaza Solidarity Campaign

Discontinuing a subject after the Census date

Departments.

ACAR is an autonomous space that organises around issues relating to people of colour, in activist and educational ways from a student perspective.

The University of Sydney Disabilities Collective is an autonomous collective of the University of Sydney Students' Representative Council (SRC).

The Sydney University Education Action Group (EAG) campaigns on education issues including fighting for free education and stopping course cuts.

The Enviro Collective, is the official environmental group of the SRC.

We are a dedicated group of First Nations activists and allies at the University of Sydney.

• Global Solidarity Category Global Solidarity

• Intercampus Category Intercampus

• Interfaith Category Interfaith

The International Students' Collective (ISC) is an SRC Collective that exists to represent and orgaanise around the interests of international students.

• Mature age students Category Mature age students

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

• You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
• You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
• You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
• A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

Crushing consequences of housing crisis laid bare

Convened by Everybody’s Home, the People’s Commission’s report is based on the submissions and testimony of more than 1,500 Australians who voiced their experiences of the housing crisis and the action they want government to take.

The People’s Commission recommends the federal government create 750,000 social homes within two decades, abolish investor tax concessions, and coordinate strong national rental reform.

Other recommendations include: expanding social housing eligibility, recognising housing as a human right, raising the rate of working age payments, additional funding for crisis housing services, and improving productivity in home building by increasing the capacity of the modular housing industry.

The People’s Commission’s report also unveils new data from a survey of more than 120 frontline organisations ranking the top impacts of the housing crisis on clients:

• Nine in ten (90%) ranked stress or mental-ill health as one of the biggest impacts

• Three in four (75%) nominated homelessness

• Three in five (57%) said forgoing meals, medication or other essential services

• Two in five (39%) said disconnection from family or community

• One in three (32%) said inability to leave an unsafe home environment.

University of Sydney housing expert and Commissioner, from the Sydney School of Architecture Design and Planning Professor Nicole Gurran said: “The distressing testimony we’ve heard from people who’ve experienced housing stress, insecurity and homelessness reinforces the urgency for change and the solutions required.

“Those who took part in the People’s Commission came from all walks of life – from professional women unable to retire due to housing insecurity to young people unable to access the rental market, or people with a disability unable to find a suitable home.

“An overreliance on the private market has not and will not deliver the magnitude of affordable, secure housing that Australia needs.

“Instead, national leadership is needed to restore investment to social housing, fix the unfair and inefficient tax settings that fuel demand without delivering new supply, and ensure adequate rental subsidies and protections so that tenants in the private sector can access secure and decent homes.”

Co-Commissioner Doug Cameron, former Labor Senator and Parliamentary Secretary for Housing and Homelessness, has urged the new Housing Minister Clare O’Neil to listen to the voices of Australians who gave evidence to the People’s Commission.

“The federal government must step up and change course based on the overwhelming evidence that the status quo will not solve the crisis,” Mr Cameron said.

“I applaud the fact that the new Housing Minister expresses enthusiasm to tackle the housing crisis, however it’s troubling that failed “market solutions” such as investor tax breaks continue to take precedence over increased funding for social housing.

“The federal Housing Minister and government must listen to and act for the many Australians who gave evidence to the People’s Commission by urgently addressing the distorted tax system, the lack of affordable public and community housing, and the standard of rental housing.

“We’ve heard from hundreds of Australians who are paying the price for market failure, decades of underinvestment by government and an overreliance on the private sector. Too many Australians are paying the price of government inaction including having no option but to stay in domestic violence relationships, live in shoddy conditions, and go hungry.

“Without ambitious action and increased funding for social housing, we risk becoming a more divided country. In order to build a good society and a fair society, the federal government must act urgently on the voice of the disadvantaged, middle-income and professional Australians who provided insights and recommendations to the People’s Commission.”

Everybody’s Home spokesperson Maiy Azize said: “Too many Australians are staying in unsafe relationships, skipping meals, living with toxic mould, working insane hours, or moving away from loved ones just to keep a roof over their heads. Too many Australians are living in tents, caravans, on couches or the streets because there simply aren't enough safe, decent, affordable homes for them.

“The People's Commission has done more than showcase heartbreaking stories - it has shown that voters expect the government to step up on housing. It has shown that the human suffering of the housing crisis is a consequence of governments shifting their responsibility of delivering this essential infrastructure onto the private market.

“The People’s Commission offers the federal government solutions to make housing in Australia more secure and more affordable. Our leaders can’t waste another moment to rapidly build more social housing, phase out investor tax breaks and coordinate strong national rental reform.”

Final Report

Sally quinn.

• +438 038 288
• [email protected]

Related articles

Everybody's home: national conversation about the housing crisis, why building more won't make houses affordable, sydney's hidden housing problem.