Overview

Grades will be awarded for every course in which a student is enrolled in accordance with the following system. The letter grade system is the fundamental system of assessment of course performance in graduate programs at York University. In courses where percentages are used as a means of reporting grades on individual pieces of work, the following conversion table is to be used in converting percentage grades to letter grades, unless alternative provisions for scaling and/or conversion are announced to students in writing within the first two weeks of classes.

The percentages indicated are not part of the official grading scheme and are meant only to be used as guidelines.

Grading System		Percentage
A+	Exceptional	90 - 100%
A	Excellent	85 - 89%
A-	High	80 - 84%
B+	Highly Satisfactory	75 - 79%
B	Satisfactory	70 - 74%
C	Conditional	60 - 69%
F	Failure	0 - 59%
I	Incomplete	N/A

 

Note: Different grading systems and grading regulations apply in the graduate programs in the Schulich School of Business and the Graduate Program in Environmental Studies. Consult the appropriate calendar or handbook for more information.

Grades in Courses

Course directors must announce in writing, in each course within the first two weeks of classes, the nature and weighting of course assignments and their due dates, including, if applicable, assessment and/or grading requirements with respect to attendance and participation. In keeping with reporting dates, the expectation is that course assignments can normally be accomplished within the course period.

In exceptional circumstances, a previously announced marking scheme for a course may be changed, but only with the unanimous consent of students; the new marking scheme must also be distributed in written form.

Grade Reappraisals

Grade reappraisals in the Faculty of Graduate Studies are governed by the Senate Principles Regarding Grade Reappraisals.

Grade reappraisals are undertaken in the unit offering the course. These principles, articulated for the Faculty of Graduate Studies, are as follows. (Students in the Schulich School of Business should consult their program offices for grade reappraisals procedures.)

1. Students may, with sufficient academic grounds, request that a final grade in a course be reappraised (which may mean the review of specific pieces of tangible work). Non-academic grounds are not relevant for grade reappraisals; in such cases, students are advised to petition to the Faculty of Graduate Studies through their graduate program office. For grade reappraisals, students are expected first to contact the course director to discuss the grade received and to request that their tangible work be reviewed. Tangible work may include written, graphic, digitized, modelled, video recording or audio recording formats, but not oral work.

Students need to be aware that a request for a grade reappraisal may result in the original grade being raised, lowered or confirmed.

2. In the event that the student is still not satisfied with the final grade OR the course director is not available to review the work, the student may submit in writing a formal request for a grade reappraisal to the graduate program in which the course is offered. The Senate approved deadline for submitting grade reappraisals is February 15 for fall term grades, June 15 for fall/winter session and winter term grades, September 30 for summer session grades, or a minimum of 21 days from the release of grades, whichever is later. When a submission deadline occurs on a weekend or holiday, requests will be accepted up until the end of the next available business day. Exercising discretion about minor delays in meeting the deadline which results from slow mail delivery or extraordinary circumstances is reasonable.

3. If the condition of sufficient academic grounds has been met, the student must submit:

1. a copy of the marked assignment,
2. a clean copy of the assignment (i.e., a copy of the assignment minus comments of the course director), and
3. a copy of any instructions given in relation to completing the assignment.

The graduate program director (or designate) will be responsible for ensuring:

1. that, by comparing the marked and clean copies of the assignment, the clean copy of the assignment is an unaltered copy of the work to be reappraised,
2. that the description provided by the student in relation to the nature of the assignment and the instructions given for the assignment is verified with the faculty member concerned,
3. that the faculty member who graded the work provides a statement indicating the grade assigned the work and the rationale for that grade,
4. that the clean copy of the assignment is reappraised by an appropriate faculty member,
5. that the student and reappraiser identities are not disclosed to each other, and
6. that the results of the reappraisal (including the reappraiser’s comments) and the route of appeal are communicated to both the student and the course director.

The reappraiser will be given:

1. the clean copy of the assignment,
2. a description of the nature of the assignment and any instructions provided to students regarding the completion of the assignment, and
3. the rationale for the original grade.

It is expected that every effort will be made to render the decision within 30 days of the reappraiser having received the work.

4. Parties to the decision may appeal a negative decision on a request for a reappraisal, or the result of the reappraisal itself to the Petitions Committee of the Faculty of Graduate Studies (for graduate courses at York) or, for undergraduate courses, to the Faculty-level appeals committee in the Faculty in which the course is offered. The only grounds that will be considered are procedural irregularity. Procedural irregularity is defined as actions taken or not taken by a department, Faculty, graduate program, its officers, committees, or members with respect to the previous disposition of the case which violates or nullify one or all of the following:

1. normal and written procedures of the University, Faculty, graduate program or department concerned;
2. consistency in the Faculty’s, graduate program’s or department’s handling of cases substantially similar to that being appealed;
3. principles of equity, natural justice or fairness, whether or not such violation occurred in accord with written or customary procedures. Appeals based on allegations of these last procedural irregularities should allege and demonstrate obvious bias or other misbehaviour on the part of the officers or agents of the University and for which redress was not provided by an authority that considered the case prior to the appeal.

Appeals must be submitted within 21 days of notification of the decision. Faculty committees may waive that deadline when special circumstances are established by the appellant. No member of the Faculty committee shall consider an appeal if s/he considered the matter at an earlier level. At the discretion of the Faculty committee, the student and/or the faculty member may be invited to meet with the Committee to present their case orally. The Committee’s decision will be taken in camera and it is expected that parties will be informed of the decision in writing within 30 days of the filing of the appeal.

5. Parties to the appeal at the Faculty-level may file an application for leave to appeal the decision to the Senate Appeals Committee (SAC) on the ground of procedural irregularity at the Faculty-level. Applications for leave to appeal must be submitted within 21 days of the notification of the Faculty decision. SAC may waive that deadline when special circumstances are established by the appellant. No member of SAC shall consider the application if s/he considered the matter at an earlier level. As explained in the SAC procedures, parties may appear before the Committee if leave to appeal is granted to make oral submissions on the ground of procedural irregularity. The Committee’s decision will be taken in camera and it is expected that the parties will be informed of the decision in writing within 30 days of the filing of the application.

6. Parties to the decision of the Senate Appeals Committee may apply to the Committee to have the matter reconsidered if there is evidence of procedural irregularity on the part of SAC. Applications must be submitted within 21 days of the posting of the decision.  SAC reserves the right to waive this deadline in special circumstances. Requests for reconsideration of a SAC decision will be considered by a panel of SAC members who did not serve on the panel first hearing the matter; it is expected that a decision will be rendered within 30 days of its submission.