The role of mediation within university protocols concerning student complaints and appeals

Abstract

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:573577 [] For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -As the predicted escalation in the litigation becomes a reality for universities in the UK, increasing importance is placed on the consideration given to the integrity of institutional protocols regulating decision making at all stages of student progression. The purpose of this paper is to outline the structures that are in place to provide an analysis of the issues that arise when these protocols are activated. Design/methodology/approach -This paper first, provides a brief yet accessible overview of the literature concerning the institutions involved in student appeal, second, explains the principles that should be applied when using and analysing university protocols, third, analyses the role that mediation can play within the sector, and finally, discusses the disability dimension within a complaints context. Findings -It can be seen that disputes between student and institution are on the rise for a number of reasons, be it finance, complexity of legislation or otherwise. The robust nature of what the office of the independent adjudicator (OIA) does seems evident from the lack of successful challenge by way of judicial review, even though the process has been held to be reviewable in a limited way at least. Perhaps this will give some reassurance to the aggrieved student that their version of events will be heard and judged fairly, but the overwhelming message to institutions must be to address potential issues early by means of well drafted protocols, management of student expectation and possibly the establishment of some sort of campus ombudsman which may help deter, deflect or even solve disputes. The role of the OIA seems here to stay and the amount of business it does is likely to increase. Originality/value -Increasing importance is placed on the consideration given to the integrity of institutional protocols regulating decision making at all stages of student progression. A wide variety of elements can impact on the quality of service expected compared with that provided to a student cohort, and this results in a diversity of potential complain...

International student complaint behaviour: Understanding how East-Asian business and management students respond to dissatisfaction during their university experience

“…His research noted that many universities failed to adequately record complaints at the informal level, making an overall judgment on the prevalence of student dissatisfaction far more problematic. Given the increased usage of the OIAHE by students from a variety of backgrounds, this places greater emphasis on universities to manage student expectations and develop well crafted protocols to follow in the event of formal student complaints (Hoorebeek, Gale, & Walker, 2011). Su and Bao (2001) found that 33% of US students could be described as "passive recipients" who, instead of venting dissatisfaction externally, will do nothing in response to negative experiences.…”