To: Stadio School of Law, Ms. Leana Diedericks, Dr Bridget Manyaga, Ms. Tharina Viljoen & Mr Jacques Naude
We, the undersigned students enrolled in LOC262 (Law of Contract), respectfully submit this petition to raise concerns about the structure and administration of the June 2025 examination.
While it is acknowledged that the module did not explicitly guarantee an exam scope, we note with concern the significant disparity in preparatory guidance provided to LOC262 students compared to students enrolled in the LCN module, which also covers Law of Contract content. It is our understanding that LCN students received a detailed and directive exam scope in advance of their examination, whereas LOC262 students did not benefit from similar academic support.
This discrepancy raises the following issues for consideration:
- Academic Consistency and Equality of Treatment: The provision of materially different levels of preparatory support across modules with overlapping content calls into question the principle of equal academic treatment and may undermine consistency in assessment standards.
- Clarity of Expectation: A central tenet of fair assessment is that students are provided with clear and transparent guidance as to what will be evaluated. In the absence of such clarity, the reasonable expectations of students are compromised.
- Alignment with Teaching and Materials: Based on collective feedback from the LOC262 cohort, a significant portion of the examination content appeared to fall outside the areas of emphasis conveyed in lectures, tutorials, and prescribed materials. This misalignment creates ambiguity regarding what constitutes appropriate preparation and may adversely affect academic outcomes despite diligent study efforts.
We submit this petition not to seek preferential treatment, but to request that the principles of academic support, procedural fairness, and consistency be reviewed in the context of the LOC262 examination. Specifically, we respectfully request that the Faculty consider:
- A review of the content and scope alignment of the LOC262 exam with the prescribed curriculum;
- An inquiry into the rationale for divergent approaches to exam preparation support between LOC262 and LCN;
- The potential for academic mitigation or adjustment in grading to reflect the circumstances described.
This petition is submitted in good faith, with the intention of upholding academic standards and ensuring a fair and equitable learning environment for all students.
Signed in the interest of procedural fairness and the academic integrity of the institution.
Kind Regards,
Matthew Dylan Pienaar - 26508664
Contact Details: [email protected] & 076 800 3040
On behalf of the LOC262 cohort – June 2025
19 Comments
The structure was compiled with topics not covered during the online classes, it is unfair that our fellow student who were doing LCN 301 were somehow given an upper hand during the preparation of the exam
We are not concerned about a exam scope, but rather the way in which we were taught compared to the other group under Law of Contract, alot of information in the exam was completely foreign to us and unfortunately we have been disadvantaged in this regard.
Not happy with assignment.
I agree with the content of the petition and therefore sign it in my own capacity.
Any guidance and support from Stadio will be appreciated.
For long distance learning It was unfair for us to to be guided or atlist given a scope for exam...law of contract it's alot to study on your own and expected to study everything while last semester students were given the scope..what was the difference this year
I fully agree to the points raised in this petition. I hold the same opinion of dissatisfaction on the structure of June 2025 examination.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via . Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Copy link or share directly
To: Stadio School of Law, Ms. Leana Diedericks, Dr Bridget Manyaga, Ms. Tharina Viljoen & Mr Jacques Naude
We, the undersigned students enrolled in LOC262 (Law of Contract), respectfully submit this petition to raise concerns about the structure and administration of the June 2025 examination.
While it is acknowledged that the module did not explicitly guarantee an exam scope, we note with concern the significant disparity in preparatory guidance provided to LOC262 students compared to students enrolled in the LCN module, which also covers Law of Contract content. It is our understanding that LCN students received a detailed and directive exam scope in advance of their examination, whereas LOC262 students did not benefit from similar academic support.
This discrepancy raises the following issues for consideration:
- Academic Consistency and Equality of Treatment: The provision of materially different levels of preparatory support across modules with overlapping content calls into question the principle of equal academic treatment and may undermine consistency in assessment standards.
- Clarity of Expectation: A central tenet of fair assessment is that students are provided with clear and transparent guidance as to what will be evaluated. In the absence of such clarity, the reasonable expectations of students are compromised.
- Alignment with Teaching and Materials: Based on collective feedback from the LOC262 cohort, a significant portion of the examination content appeared to fall outside the areas of emphasis conveyed in lectures, tutorials, and prescribed materials. This misalignment creates ambiguity regarding what constitutes appropriate preparation and may adversely affect academic outcomes despite diligent study efforts.
We submit this petition not to seek preferential treatment, but to request that the principles of academic support, procedural fairness, and consistency be reviewed in the context of the LOC262 examination. Specifically, we respectfully request that the Faculty consider:
- A review of the content and scope alignment of the LOC262 exam with the prescribed curriculum;
- An inquiry into the rationale for divergent approaches to exam preparation support between LOC262 and LCN;
- The potential for academic mitigation or adjustment in grading to reflect the circumstances described.
This petition is submitted in good faith, with the intention of upholding academic standards and ensuring a fair and equitable learning environment for all students.
Signed in the interest of procedural fairness and the academic integrity of the institution.
Kind Regards,
Matthew Dylan Pienaar - 26508664
Contact Details: [email protected] & 076 800 3040
On behalf of the LOC262 cohort – June 2025
19 Comments
Teaching method did not cater for part time students who are currently at work during the day because sessions where done midday and not recorded. The scope or rather exam session focused on things that were far from what the exam entailed
The structure was compiled with topics not covered during the online classes, it is unfair that our fellow student who were doing LCN 301 were somehow given an upper hand during the preparation of the exam
We are not concerned about a exam scope, but rather the way in which we were taught compared to the other group under Law of Contract, alot of information in the exam was completely foreign to us and unfortunately we have been disadvantaged in this regard.
Not happy with assignment.
I agree with the content of the petition and therefore sign it in my own capacity.
Any guidance and support from Stadio will be appreciated.
For long distance learning It was unfair for us to to be guided or atlist given a scope for exam...law of contract it's alot to study on your own and expected to study everything while last semester students were given the scope..what was the difference this year
I fully agree to the points raised in this petition. I hold the same opinion of dissatisfaction on the structure of June 2025 examination.
Help this petition grow
Share it with friends to help reach 50 signatures.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via .
Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
Signing with Google or Facebook verifies your signature instantly — no email needed.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
Teaching method did not cater for part time students who are currently at work during the day because sessions where done midday and not recorded. The scope or rather exam session focused on things that were far from what the exam entailed