Appealing Misconduct

Students need to clearly identify the specific procedural issue they believe occurred and provide evidence to support any claim of a breach of procedural fairness. Procedural fairness focuses on whether a decision was made through a fair and proper process. This includes being given a reasonable chance to present your side and having your matter considered by an unbiased decision‑maker.

It is not enough to simply say that the outcome feels unfair. A personal belief or disagreement with the decision does not, on its own, demonstrate a breach of procedural fairness and cannot be used as grounds for an appeal. Students are encouraged to review Western’s Procedural Fairness and Good Decision Making guidelines for further guidance.

Remember, procedural fairness is about how the decision was made, not whether you agree with the result. A decision can still be procedurally fair even if it leads to an outcome you are unhappy with, as long as the process was impartial and you were given an opportunity to present your case.

Examples of breaches of procedural fairness include

• A student who has failed a subject and submits a Review of Grade, but it not given the opportunity in the Review of Grade application to provide reasoning or information to the decision-maker before the decision is made.
• A student sits an assessment and fails because they did not include something that was not outlined in the marking rubric or subject outline.
• A student who has failed a subject and submits a Review of Grade, but the Review of Grade is not reviewed by an unbiased decision maker.
• A decision in the Review of Grade directly goes against a published policy of the University e.g. a student not being granted a supplementary assessment task even though they have met the requirements within the Assessment Policy.
• When a decision-maker does not appropriately consider the evidence and reasoning provided by a Student in their Review of Grade application (provided the Review of Grade was made in line with the reasoning provided in Cl 49 of the Assessment Policy).
• When a student has an Academic Reasonable Adjustment Plan (ARAP) that is not complied with.
• When students are provided with inconsistent information in regard to the requirements of an assessment task which caused them to fail an assessment or subject.

Things that are not breaches of procedural fairness include

• A student missed a compulsory teaching activity or assessment task due to illness and did not submit a Disruption to Studies or request for extension within the timeframes outlined within the University’s policy and as a consequence has failed a subject.
• A student was feeling stressed or overwhelmed during an exam which lead to them failing their assessment and/or subject.

More information on procedural fairness can be found in the FAQ’s for students seeking to appeal an Academic Decision.

Substantial and Relevant New Evidence

If a student selects substantial or relevant new evidence, this must be evidence that was not available to the student at the time that they made a Review of Grade application or could not have been made available at the time. A student cannot make an application using evidence that they chose not to include in their Review of Grade application, or that was submitted as part of their Review of Grade application. For example, a witness statement could have been made available at the time of the Review of Grade application had the student decided to obtain it. The student stated in their supporting document that it was not available because it had not been obtained at the time of the Review of Grade application.

Please be advised that the decisions made in relation to Review of Grade outcomes for other students are not appropriate as new evidence. Each matter of a Review of Grade application is personal to that student and is directly related to their own personal circumstances and cannot be compared. It is expected that there will be varying outcomes for students in Review of Grade outcomes and this is considered normal. Even if a student feels that the circumstances are the same, there may be other circumstances they are not aware of that are personal and only relate to that student and their outcome. This information would not be accepted as new evidence.

Please be advised that all new evidence should directly relate to the reason for the Review of Grade application, including “The assessment requirements as specified in the subject outlined were varied in an unreasonable way, assessment requirements specified in the subject outline were unreasonably or prejudicially applied or due regard has not been paid to the evidence of illness or misadventure”.

Will I be invited to appear at an appeals hearing?

Students may be invited to attend a student appeal hearing; however, they do not have an automatic right to appear in person before the Committee. Because of this, your appeal submission must include all supporting documentation. You may send your materials directly to this email address.

How can advocates help with appealing misconduct findings?

• Explaining the appeal process in simple terms so students know what to expect.
• Identify valid grounds for appeal (e.g., procedural fairness issues, new evidence, the sanction is excessive).
• Help by gathering and organising evidence such as emails, timelines, and documents.
• Supporting students to write a clear, structured appeal in line with the appropriate grounds of appeal.
• Checking that the student understands procedural fairness and how it applies to their case.
• Preparing the student for meetings or hearings, including practising what to say.
• Attending meetings as a support person, taking notes and offering reassurance.
• Explaining outcomes received and help the student understand next steps, including external appeal or complaints mechanisms.
• Providing emotional and wellbeing support during what can be a stressful process.

How can I access the Western Sydney University Student Union Advocacy Service?

Please contact the Student Advocacy Service to make an appointment with an advocate by emailing: scc@westernsydney.edu.au

The Western Sydney University Student Union Advocacy Service is open throughout the year, and can be accessed Monday to Friday, 9am-4.30pm. Appointments can be made via zoom, phone or on campus.

External Complaints Mechanisms

At any stage of the complaints process, you can choose to take your concern to an external agency. These may include:

• National Student Ombudsman (NSO)
• NSW Ombudsman
• Anti-Discrimination Board of NSW
• Australian Human Rights Commission

If you contact the Ombudsman before raising the issue with the university, they are likely to ask you about any attempts you’ve made to resolve the concern directly with the university.