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

=== HU-177: Institutional leadership gave contemporaneous, conflicting instructions on whether a grade appeal was required for the July 15, 2026 Exam II disruption documented in HU-175 ===
{| class="wikitable" style="width:100%"
! style="width:14em" | Severity
| Medium
! Status
| CONFIRMED as to the two written instructions; characterization as a repeated institutional pattern is POSSIBLE pending fuller comparison against HU-166
|-
! Issue type
| Conflicting Institutional Instructions on Grade Appeal Requirement
! Date added
| 2026-07-17
|-
! Owner
| colspan="3" | Dr. Stacey Gombar / Dr. Danielle Laban / Herzing Academic Affairs
|}
'''Finding.''' On the day of the exam disruption documented in {{HU|HU-175}}, Dr. Stacey Gombar advised the reporting student to complete the Grade Appeal form as soon as possible per policy, and to follow up with faculty or leadership regarding a new exam link if the appeal was approved. The following day, Dr. Danielle Laban's email stated that Herzing would not require the reporting student to go through the appeal process at all, because the disruption was caused by a technical issue outside his control. Both instructions were given in good faith and are not necessarily incompatible if Dr. Laban's email is read as superseding Dr. Gombar's same day advice once the Elsevier root cause was identified; however, from the student's perspective the two instructions arrived close together from two different institutional offices and created uncertainty about which process governed. This is logged as an item for review regarding clarity and consistency of appeal related guidance, not as a confirmed policy violation. This tracker already documents an earlier instance of same thread conflicting appeal instructions at {{HU|HU-166}}; whether {{HU|HU-177}} reflects a repeated institutional pattern or two isolated events should be assessed by comparing the two entries directly.

'''Evidence.''' Dr. Stacey Gombar, written recap of their same day phone call: advice to complete the Grade Appeal form as soon as possible per policy and to follow up on a new exam link if approved. Dr. Danielle Laban, email, Jul 16, 2026, 4:45 PM: statement that the reporting student would not be required to go through the appeal process because the impact was due to a technical issue outside his control. Source: Written phone call recap from Dr. Stacey Gombar, same day as the Jul 15, 2026 exam disruption; email from Dr. Danielle Laban, Jul 16, 2026, 4:45 PM.

'''Reported statement.'''
<blockquote>I advised you to complete the Grade Appeal form ASAP per policy, and advised you to follow up with faculty and leadership regarding a new exam link if approved.</blockquote>

'''Standards.''' HLC Criterion 2.A (integrity in communications, including clear and consistent guidance to students) and 34 C.F.R. Section 668.14 (administrative capability). Compare against the grade appeal procedure published in the current Herzing University catalog, catoid 80, to determine whether the catalog contemplates a technical failure exception to the standard appeal process, or whether such an exception is being applied on an ad hoc basis.

'''Impact.''' A student receiving two different instructions about whether a formal appeal is required, from two different offices within a 24 hour period, risks confusion about deadlines and required steps, and risks either missing a required appeal window if Dr. Laban's waiver is later reversed, or unnecessarily duplicating effort if both instructions were meant to apply.

'''Notes.''' Request written, singular confirmation from Herzing of whether the previously drafted NSG524 grade appeal is still required for this specific exam session or is formally superseded by Dr. Laban's waiver, and request that this confirmation come from the office with final authority over grade appeals. Cross-references: {{HU|HU-175}} (underlying exam session failure), {{HU|HU-176}} (Elsevier acknowledgment and appeal waiver), {{HU|HU-166}} (earlier same thread conflicting appeal instructions; compare directly for pattern assessment).