We, the signatories below, believe that the final examination of BIOB34H3 Y during the summer of 2012, taught by Dr. A. Elia, did not accurately reflect the content of the course as outlined by the syllabus.  Nor we do believe that the examination was a fair representation of the academic integrity of the University of Toronto.  We believe the examination did not fall within the goals, policies, or purpose of the University of Toronto. Therefore,

• Whereas the University of Toronto  “is dedicated to fostering an academic community in which the learning and scholarship of every member may flourish”,­1 and
  
• Whereas “Grades are a measure of the performance of a student in individual courses. Each student shall be judged on the basis of how well he or she has command of the course materials.”,2 and
  
• Whereas the “…University has a responsibility to ensure that the evaluative process meets the highest standards of fairness and honesty…”,3 and
  
• Whereas the “course syllabus establishes a learning contract between [the students and the professor]. It outlines the topics [to be] covered and the learning objectives of the course; it lays out what [is expected] of [the] students, what they can expect of [the professor], and how [the professor] will evaluate them.”,4 and
  
• Whereas grades “should be closely tied to the learning objectives set out in the course syllabus.”,5 and
  
• Whereas the University of Toronto has a goal of “fair, consistent and thoughtful grading practices.”,6 and
  
• Whereas “every division shall establish divisional appeal procedures. Students may appeal grades according to the procedures established for that purpose in the division.”,7
  
• Whereas the final examination contained questions that were testing material that was not within the assigned textbook pages, the lecture slides, nor mentioned within lectures, and
  
• Whereas the exam breakdown was conveyed to the students only two nights prior to the final exam, and
  
• Whereas the communication between the instructors (Dr. Elia and the Teaching Assistant) and the students enrolled in the course was unreliable, and inadequate for an institution of such caliber as the University of Toronto, and
  
• Whereas this unreliable communication prevented proper test viewings and resulted in many unanswered emails,
  

We,We the undersigned, respectfully request that a review of Dr. Elia’s examinations and suitability to teaching the BIOB34 summer semester course be conducted. In addition, we request that the grades for the Summer 2012 class be adjusted to accommodate for these concerns, whether it be a redistribution of the course mark breakdown, or the application of a significant bell curve to the final exam, or the course in general.

1.          Statement of Institutional Purpose, Purpose of the University http://www.governingcouncil.utoronto.ca/policies/mission.htm
   
2.          Grading Practices Policy, Meaning of Grades http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~vpdean/documents/GradingPracticesPolicy_000.pdf
   
3.          Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters, Preamble http://www.governingcouncil.utoronto.ca/policies/behaveac.htm
   
4.          UTSC Academic Handbook, III.1: Course Syllabus http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~vpdean/documents/Academic_Handbook.November_2011.final_001.pdf
   
5.          UTSC Academic Handbook, IV.1: Principles of Grading http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~vpdean/documents/Academic_Handbook.November_2011.final_001.pdf
   
6. .         Marks Guideline and Review Processes http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~vpdean/documents/MarksGuidelinesandReview_000.pdf
   
7.          Grading Practices Policy, II.6 http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~vpdean/documents/GradingPracticesPolicy_000.pdf
   
8.