3/9/13

University of London International Programmes Mail - Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Law exam grade

MOSHE YIFTAH ADMON <ma183@student.london.ac.uk>

Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Law exam grade
3 messages Moshe Admon <ma183@student.london.ac.uk> To: Vice Chancellor <Vice-Chancellor@london.ac.uk> Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:43 AM

Professor Sir Adrian Smith, FRS Vice Chancellor University of London

Dear Vice Chancellor,

I would like to appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson, Director of Corporate Performance and Quality, in respect of my complaint about the marking of my 2012 Trusts examination paper. I am not confident that the mark I was awarded was fair and that proper procedures were followed. In her letter of November 6th, Dr. Wilson says that an important feature of the University of London International Programmes examinations is that a preponderance of markers are employed by the Colleges of the University of London and routinely grade papers taken by on-campus students. This is central to securing the standard of the University of London award. As you may know, Professor Norman Baird has published on his website (http://www.llblondon.com/ examiners/llb-examiners-may-june-2012/) information about the examination markers of the papers in the law of Trusts exam which I sat in 2012 and less than half of the markers were from one of the London colleges. Professor Baird states on his website that the information was provided by the University itself under the United Kingdom Freedom of Information Act. Dr. Wilson also says that subject areas use moderation and standardization meetings to address differences in marking and to reduce some of the subjectivity that my influence marking. I sent an email to Dr. Wilson asking for confirmation that there was a standardization meeting of the law of Trusts examiners and that the examiners who marked my paper were present. I have not had confirmation that this important procedure was followed. If these procedures were not followed, that may explain why my Trust mark was much below my grade average. Equally distressing, the University also informed Professor Baird that it did not have any marking guidelines for the law of Trusts examination (http://www.llblondon.com/marking-guidelines/marking-guidelines-not-held-in-allhttps://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=2a25069643&view=pt&search=inbox&th=13d1762e0002d362&dsqt=1 1/7

3/9/13

University of London International Programmes Mail - Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Law exam grade

subjects/). Additionally Dr. Wilson states at the end of her letter that my script was reviewed by the Chair of the Examination Board who confirmed the mark awarded, but does not state the Chair reviewed the substance of my exam and confirmed the mark. In view of the fact that the specific set of University procedures described by Dr. Wilson as central to securing the standards of the University were not followed I appeal against the decision to reject my complaint. The grade of 45 which I was awarded falls much below the average of my cumulative marks, has caused me great psychological distress (as explained in my letter to Director Hamilton dated October 2, 2012), will certainly harm me significantly in future educational endeavors, specifically my desire to be admitted into a graduate law program at Oxford, Cambridge, UCL or any quality program in the United States, and will significantly harm my future employment potential. Since very little action has been taken regarding my requests for more openness and transparency in the marking processes, I took the initiative to create a website - (http://www.llbstudentvoice.org ) - to air my grievances, suggestions, publish all my correspondence with the University of London, and create a petition requesting a list of changes to be implemented by the Programmes, which has been signed by 77 students. So you are aware, a majority of my requests and suggestions have been rebuffed by the University. Thank you for your time in answering this letter. I will appreciate if you can attach a Completion of Procedures letter to your response.

Yours Sincerely,
-Moshe Admon, B.Sc., B.A. LL.B. Class of 2013, University of London International Programmes SRN = 090389029 Moshe Admon <ma183@student.london.ac.uk> To: Vice-Chancellor@london.ac.uk Hello, I emailed this letter to the Vice Chancellor yesterday, 2/26/12. I will appreciate if you can please confirm receipt. Thank you. Yours Sincerely, Moshe Admon, B.Sc., B.A. LL.B. Class of 2013, University of London International Programmes SRN = 090389029 Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:02 AM

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=2a25069643&view=pt&search=inbox&th=13d1762e0002d362&dsqt=1

2/7

3/9/13

University of London International Programmes Mail - Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Law exam grade

Professor Sir Adrian Smith, FRS Vice Chancellor University of London

Dear Vice Chancellor,

I would like to appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson, Director of Corporate Performance and Quality, in respect of my complaint about the marking of my 2012 Trusts examination paper. I am not confident that the mark I was awarded was fair and that proper procedures were followed. In her letter of November 6th, Dr. Wilson says that an important feature of the University of London International Programmes examinations is that a preponderance of markers are employed by the Colleges of the University of London and routinely grade papers taken by on-campus students. This is central to securing the standard of the University of London award. As you may know, Professor Norman Baird has published on his website (http://www.llblondon.com/ examiners/llb-examiners-may-june-2012/) information about the examination markers of the papers in the law of Trusts exam which I sat in 2012 and less than half of the markers were from one of the London colleges. Professor Baird states on his website that the information was provided by the University itself under the United Kingdom Freedom of Information Act. Dr. Wilson also says that subject areas use moderation and standardization meetings to address differences in marking and to reduce some of the subjectivity that my influence marking. I sent an email to Dr. Wilson asking for confirmation that there was a standardization meeting of the law of Trusts examiners and that the examiners who marked my paper were present. I have not had confirmation that this important procedure was followed. If these procedures were not followed, that may explain why my Trust mark was much below my grade average. Equally distressing, the University also informed Professor Baird that it did not have any marking guidelines for the law of Trusts examination (http://www.llblondon.com/marking-guidelines/marking-guidelines-not-held-in-allsubjects/). Additionally Dr. Wilson states at the end of her letter that my script was reviewed by the Chair of the Examination Board who confirmed the mark awarded, but does not state the Chair reviewed the substance of my exam and confirmed the mark. In view of the fact that the specific set of University procedures described by Dr. Wilson as central to securing the standards of the University were not followed I appeal against the decision to reject my complaint.
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=2a25069643&view=pt&search=inbox&th=13d1762e0002d362&dsqt=1 3/7

3/9/13

University of London International Programmes Mail - Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Law exam grade

The grade of 45 which I was awarded falls much below the average of my cumulative marks, has caused me great psychological distress (as explained in my letter to Director Hamilton dated October 2, 2012), will certainly harm me significantly in future educational endeavors, specifically my desire to be admitted into a graduate law program at Oxford, Cambridge, UCL or any quality program in the United States, and will significantly harm my future employment potential. Since very little action has been taken regarding my requests for more openness and transparency in the marking processes, I took the initiative to create a website - (http://www.llbstudentvoice.org ) - to air my grievances, suggestions, publish all my correspondence with the University of London, and create a petition requesting a list of changes to be implemented by the Programmes, which has been signed by 77 students. So you are aware, a majority of my requests and suggestions have been rebuffed by the University. Thank you for your time in answering this letter. I will appreciate if you can attach a Completion of Procedures letter to your response.

Yours Sincerely,
-Moshe Admon, B.Sc., B.A. LL.B. Class of 2013, University of London International Programmes SRN = 090389029

Fiona Bernardone <Fiona.Bernardone@london.ac.uk> To: Moshe Admon <ma183@student.london.ac.uk>

Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:15 AM

Dear Moshe

I can confirm that your email has been received. You will receive a response in due course.

Yours sincerely

Fiona Bernardone (Mrs) PA to the Vice-Chancellor University of London Senate House | Malet Street | London WC 1E 7HU | UK Web: www.london.ac.uk

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=2a25069643&view=pt&search=inbox&th=13d1762e0002d362&dsqt=1

4/7