Letter to the Vice-Chancellor of UoL Feb 26

3/9/13 University of London International Programmes Mail - Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Law exam grade

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=2a25069643&view=pt&search=inbox&th=13d1762e0002d362&dsqt=1 1/7

MOSHE YIFTAH ADMON <[email protected]>

Appeal against the decision of the Dr. Wilson regarding my 2012 Trust Lawexam grade3 messages

Moshe Admon <[email protected]> Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 8:43 AMTo: Vice Chancellor <[email protected]>

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-all-

http://www.llblondon.com/examiners/llb-examiners-may-june-2012/

http://www.llblondon.com/marking-guidelines/marking-guidelines-not-held-in-all-subjects/



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 ProgrammesSRN = 090389029

Moshe Admon <[email protected]> Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:02 AMTo: [email protected]

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 ProgrammesSRN = 090389029


http://www.llbstudentvoice.org/



Professor Sir Adrian Smith, FRS

Vice Chancellor


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-all-

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.

http://www.llblondon.com/examiners/llb-examiners-may-june-2012/




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 ProgrammesSRN = 090389029

Fiona Bernardone <[email protected]> Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:15 AMTo: Moshe Admon <[email protected]>

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


Senate House | Malet Street | London WC1E 7HU | UK

Web: www.london.ac.uk

http://www.llbstudentvoice.org/

http://www.london.ac.uk/

Documents

Letter to the Vice-Chancellor of UoL Feb 26