Summary
Mr C complained about the marking of his dissertation. One of the markers had emailed Mr C to say that he had made a procedural error in submitting the mark he initially felt the dissertation deserved. The university rejected Mr C's subsequent complaint as the marking had been undertaken in line with their procedures. Mr C brought his complaint to us.
We decided that the marker had made an error, but that it was not a procedural one, simply that an incorrect mark had been entered. However, this error was mitigated against by subsequent reconciliation of the mark with the second marker and scrutiny by an external examiner. We did not uphold the complaint.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201507737 as a PDF (10.91 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018