We, the undersigned students, are petitioning for a fair and just resolution to a serious error on our recent math exam. The exam consisted of five multiple-choice questions only, and it was clearly stated both in writing and verbally that:

1. The exam would contain only multiple-choice questions (with answer options A, B, C, or D).

2. Only the answer sheet would be graded. No partial marks would be given for showing calculations or work.

However, question 4 contained no correct answer. This was confirmed by multiple students and later acknowledged by faculty. Despite this, the university has chosen not to throw out the flawed question. Instead, they are now selectively grading the students’ calculations for that one question—ignoring the originally stated rules of the exam.

This approach is unfair and inconsistent:

• Students who trusted the instructions and erased or crossed out their work (thinking they were wrong) are being penalized.

• Some students guessed the “most correct” option, as expected in a multiple-choice format, and are now disadvantaged for following the exam format.

• Others had no way of knowing which question was flawed since the proctors said only that “one question might be incorrect,” without specifying which one.

This situation creates inequity, confusion, and penalizes students for an error that was not theirs.

We are not asking to rewrite the exam. We are not asking for special treatment. We are simply asking for full points to be awarded to all students for question 4, to correct this error in a fair and consistent way.

According to § 79 UG, serious procedural defects – such as administering an unanswerable question – entitle students to request correction or annulment of the exam. However, cancellation is not mandatory; awarding full credit for question 4 is a lawful and proportionate remedy. § 72 UG requires objective and fair grading, and deviations from the stated rules for only one question violate principles of equal treatment.

For § 79 UG – Procedural Defects

Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung. (n.d.). Universitätsgesetz 2002 (UG), § 79 Prüfungsanfechtung bei Verfahrensfehlern. In Universitätsgesetz 2002 (Fassung vom 9. August 2002). RIS. Retrieved June 2025, from https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfr...

For § 72 UG – Fair and Objective Grading

Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung. (n.d.). Universitätsgesetz 2002 (UG), § 72 Objektivität und Vergleichbarkeit der Prüfungen. In Universitätsgesetz 2002 (Fassung vom 9. August 2002). RIS. Retrieved June 2025, from https://www.ris.bka.gv.at/GeltendeFassung.wxe?Abfr...