Editing Herzing Issues: Academic Appeals and Due Process (section)

=== HU-166b: Shannon Bishop shifted her stated rationale for the IT communication requirement within the same thread: initially citing it as required appeal documentation, then citing it as needed for tracking purposes only after the reporting student replied that the issue was not technical ===
{| class="wikitable" style="width:100%"
! style="width:14em" | Severity
| Medium
! Status
| CONFIRMED
|-
! Issue type
| Shifting Rationale for a Procedural Requirement Within the Same Thread
! Date added
| 2026-06-09
|-
! Owner
| colspan="3" | Shannon Bishop (Senior Student Services Advisor)
|}
'''Finding.''' In her first email, Shannon Bishop listed IT communication as part of the required appeal documentation alongside exam registration proof and the technology test assignment, framing it as a substantive condition for appeal completeness. After the reporting student replied that there was no Herzing IT communication because the issue was not technical, Bishop responded: "I understand, but all ProctorU appeals must have communication with our IT for tracking purposes." The stated rationale shifted within the same thread from a substantive documentation requirement to an administrative tracking requirement. This distinction is material: if IT communication is only for internal tracking, its absence does not affect the merits of the appeal, and imposing it as a blocking condition is a procedural formalism rather than a substantive prerequisite.

'''Evidence.''' Shannon Bishop first email: "For all ProctorU appeals, students must attach proof of the exam registration, the technology test assignment and communication with HU IT." Shannon Bishop second email in the same thread, after the reporting student's objection: "I understand, but all ProctorU appeals must have communication with our IT for tracking purposes." Source: Email thread among Shannon Bishop (Senior Student Services Advisor), the reporting student, and Dr. Raywattie Prashad (Program Chair of Online Prelicensure Nursing); cc'ing IT Support (ServiceNow), Dr. Danielle Laban, and Dr. Stephanie Black; provided by the reporting student, June 2026.

'''Reported statement.'''
<blockquote>[Bishop, first message:] For all ProctorU appeals, students must attach proof of the exam registration, the technology test assignment and communication with HU IT. [Bishop, second message, same thread:] I understand, but all ProctorU appeals must have communication with our IT for tracking purposes.</blockquote>

'''Standards.''' HLC Criterion 2.A (integrity and clear, consistently stated processes); 34 C.F.R. 668.14 (administrative capability). A procedural requirement whose stated rationale shifts from substantive to administrative within the same thread, specifically in response to the student's objection, raises a process-clarity and fair-process concern. The shifting rationale makes it difficult to evaluate whether the requirement is justified in this specific context or to challenge it on the merits. Lead: {{HU|HU-166}}.

'''Impact.''' The shift obscures whether IT contact is genuinely required for a weather-and-vendor appeal and provides no clear basis for the student to contest the requirement or understand its significance.

'''Notes.''' Sub-issue of {{HU|HU-166}} (lead). CONFIRMED from first-party email evidence. Documented 2026-06-09.

<span id="HU-166c"></span>