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

=== HU-163e: The burden was shifted to the student through an appeals and makeup process requiring a Herzing IT ticket and weather documentation, for a failure not of his making; faculty acknowledged they cannot set up an additional exam ===
{| class="wikitable" style="width:100%"
! style="width:14em" | Severity
| Medium
! Status
| CONFIRMED
|-
! Issue type
| Burden-Shift to Appeals / Makeup Process
! Date added
| 2026-06-06
|-
! Owner
| colspan="3" | Dr. Stacey Gombar / Dr. Raywattie Prashad (Program Chair) / Herzing Academic Affairs
|}
'''Finding.''' After the failure, Dr. Stacey Gombar relayed that the course lead and program lead advised the student to go through the appeals process to take a makeup exam, similar to any other missed exam, and to obtain a Herzing IT ticket and include the inclement weather in his documentation. This places the burden of an appeal, an IT ticket, and documentation on the student for a missed exam caused by weather and a vendor failure, and it confirms that faculty cannot set up an additional exam directly.

'''Evidence.''' Dr. Stacey Gombar email: the course lead and program lead advise going through the appeals process to take a makeup exam, obtaining a Herzing IT ticket, and including the inclement weather in the appeal documentation; Herzing faculty do not have access to set up an additional exam. Source: Dr. Stacey Gombar emails, June 6, 2026.

'''Reported statement.'''
<blockquote>They are advising that you go through the appeals process to take a makeup exam, similar to any other missed exam. Be sure that you obtain a Herzing IT ticket if you haven't already.</blockquote>

'''Standards.''' HLC Criterion 2.A (integrity and fair process); ACEN Standard 4 (fair academic standards). Routing a weather-and-vendor failure through a standard missed-exam appeal, with the documentation burden on the student, is a fairness and recourse concern, particularly where the underlying cause was outside the student's control. Lead: {{HU|HU-163}}. See {{HU|HU-155}} (a separate exam retake that was denied).

'''Impact.''' The student must now expend time and effort on an appeal and an IT ticket, with the risk that the makeup is denied as the NSG521 retake was ({{HU|HU-155}}), to recover from a failure he did not cause.

'''Notes.''' Sub-issue of {{HU|HU-163}} (lead). Documented 2026-06-06. UPDATE (2026-07-17): in this same thread, after being routed to the appeals process, the reporting student stated he would submit another grade appeal, describing it as approximately his thirteenth in two terms for a Proctor U issue, and attributed part of the underlying scheduling pressure to Herzing not giving ample notice of clinical schedules. This is offered as corroborating context for the cumulative burden documented in this sub-issue and is not independently verified as an exact count. See also {{HU|HU-182}} (a subsequent, separately documented pattern of chronic ProctorU exam-start delays).

<span id="HU-164c"></span>