Student Complaint Processes

We have implemented a new documentation system, Maxient, which allows us to administer processing student complaints and related issues. Interacting with this documentation system has prompted a few relatively minor changes in the workflow around complaints. This wiki clarifies that workflow and who is responsible for what.

The starting point for our discussion is the Student Complaint Procedure documented in the student handbook. This protocol should be understood as our division’s implementation of that procedure.

Complaints and other contacts are received in a variety of ways, but all complaints requiring formal response and action should be documented in Maxient. The dean’s office handles Maxient documentation, obviously with departmental input.

For our purposes, “complaint” means a student contact that prompts administrative response and/or action, including but not limited to complaints about professors conduct, final course grade review requests, and other types of complaints. In some cases, we have a specific process for dealing with a specific type of complaint. Consider “grade challenges”: There is a specific process to follow when students want to request a formal review of a final course grade. (See below for details on this process.) In other cases, e.g., harassment of various types, we have different processes. The table below is a reasonably comprehensive guide.

• Complaints
  • Investigation of the following categories of complaints is not pursued by instruction, but by other college offices.
    • Prohibition of Discrimination or Harassment of Students on the Basis of Disability (AR 6.02.002)
    • Prohibition of Discrimination or Harassment of Students on the Basis of Race, Color, or National Origin (AR 6.02.003)
    • Prohibition of Sexual Misconduct (AR 3.10.003)
      • Note: If you receive complaints of these types, as a “responsible employee,” you must report the complaint to the compliance office and notify my office.
  • “Grade challenges” (Requests for Formal Review of Final Course Grade) are processed by the instructional chain of command; see below for our protocol.
  • Other complaints (for instance, about professor conduct, course design/content, etc.) are handled by our instructional chain of command, beginning at the department level.

LAHC Complaint Protocol

• Informal complaints
  • Complaints about class atmosphere, conduct, course design, course content, etc. are investigated by the department chair, unless the department chair is the person about whom the complaint is submitted, in which case the dean assumes the investigative role.
  • DCs discuss the situation with the student, collect information from the professor and possibly others, and come to a resolution.
    • Throughout the process, be mindful of the student’s right to confidentiality.
  • Our goal should be to resolve student complaints informally and at the department level
  • If a resolution is not forthcoming through informal means, complaints may become formal by invoking the process delineated in the complaint procedure.
• Formal complaints
  • This protocol does not replace the official complaint procedure; rather, it ensures that complaints are processed with department involvement and allows us (in LAHC) to document processing at appropriate moments.
  • Once a formal complaint has been investigated and a conclusion reached, DCs notify the dean’s office (in writing) of the finding and actions taken, if any.
  • This process is a useful tool in identifying patterns that should prompt intervention. If you find such a pattern, you have formal and informal tools available to support professors and staff in improving.
    • These tools include faculty evaluation processes, professional development, mentoring, and the Performance Improvement Plan documented on the dean’s blog.
    • I expect departments to take advantage of these opportunities to address patterns at odds with fostering student success. Our mission is to serve the best interests of our students.
• Request for Formal Review of Final Course Grade
  • See AR 4.01.010
    • The student submits a written request with supporting documentation to the department chair.
    • DC forwards the review request packet (the formal request plus the student’s documentation) to the dean’s office for processing.
    • The dean’s office notifies the professor and requests a formal response to the student’s petition for review.
    • LAHC has standing committee co-chairs who process grade reviews (review documentation, assemble faculty committees, etc.) following the established process.
      • Departments are involved in the grade review process either informally (e.g., when the chair requests help identifying faculty to serve on review committees, etc.) or materially (e.g., when the department is asked to provide information pertinent to a specific review request).
    • The Review Committee‘s determination is submitted to the dean’s office for documentation and implementation.
      • The determination of the Review Committee is final.