Dr. Jeffrey P. Brown

Associate Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences

New Mexico State University

Las Cruces, New Mexico 88003

RE: Grade Appeal ENG 318G

Our Correspondence of February 12, 25,

March 12 and 18, 1999.

Master Link to Beginning of Correspondence File

April 14, 1999

Dear Dr. Brown:

As you review my file compiled over the last two months, containing a lengthy explanation of the events which led to my unfairly receiving a failing grade in English 318G, I would like to reconfirm my position, certainly, but also add additional information which was initially omitted. This new information has come to my attention subsequent to a series of meetings, during the last two weeks, with yourself, Interim Associate Dean William McCarthy of the College of Engineering, Dr. Chris Burnham, English Chair, and with the Vice-President for Administration, Dr. Juan Franco.

The entire folder currently at your disposal concerns valid information pertaining to the events which transpired within the class-setting itself or between myself and Instructor Kramer. I would like to outline, herebelow, several other strategic options, any one of which, or combination of which, will resolve the current impasse to everyone's satisfaction. Because the appeals process has currently reached your desk and may progress to a full presentation before an Appeals Board, with potential for a final decision at the Student Affairs Vice-President's level, my defense can now be validly broadened.

According to university officials consulted, there are clearly four methods of resolving this crisis, a crisis created essentially by my GPA having slipped to a 1.99, which is postponing awarding of my Engineering Degree, now completely and acceptably "earned" from the College of Engineering's viewpoint.

1. The challenge of Instructor Kramer's failing mark can be pursued (a) on the basis of the compelling and substantive evidence offered to date (see existing dossier on-line at: http://membres.tripod.fr/transnational/eng.htm) , and (b) in the astonishing absence of a Formal Policy Procedure concerning verification of electronic assignments in the English Department. Raising of the grade from an F to a B or a C on the basis of evidence provided would resolve the impasse.

2. The College of Arts and Sciences could suppress my English 318G grade as Dean McCarthy suggested in our meeting, and in a conversation with you in recent days. Because I was misadvised by the College of Engineering ( as mentioned in my letter of February 12th) as to the necessity of registering in this class, it was never actually required for my degree. The College of Engineering, however, cannot expunge this course from my record, since it falls within the purview of the College of Arts and Sciences to do so. Due to his College's misadvisement, Dean McCarthy is willing to write a letter asking the Business Office to refund my tuition, and it is incumbent upon your College, Sir, to expunge, not the grade, but the entire course, and hence the grade, from my record. Doing so, of course, would bounce my GPA up above the 2.00 level, making awarding of my degree possible. Due to the peculiar circumstances involved, no precedent would be set making it necessary for your College to expunge other students' failing courses under the Fairness Doctrine or in compliance with any other university or non-university policy.

3. Dean McCarthy also suggested that consideration be given to asking my Professor in CHE 455, who has already acknowledged that I submitted a commendable and passing final departmental project, to change his grade from PASSING to a LETTER GRADE. Inasmuch as the letter grade is likely to be a B, my GPA, even in the presence of an F in English 318G, would bounce to above the 2.00 level.

4. Dr. Franco, Vice President for Administration, in the meeting I was privileged to have with him earlier this month, suggested that a plausible solution would be to petition either yourself or the Appeals Board for a W in Eng 318G, given (a) clear-cut misadvisement by the College of Engineering and (b) the circumstances, adequately documented, of the unjustified mark given me in this course by Instructor Kramer. Again, the absence of a Departmental Policy for Electronic Assignments, a serious shortcoming, and the apparent inability of CANTO to reactivate my account, plus more than adequate hard-copy proof of proper assignment completion (attached to my correspondence of March 18),would certainly justify awarding of a perfectly non-committal W in this course, raising my average to or above the required 2.00 for graduation.

These four approaches, severally or jointly, are among the serious alternatives which now, at your level, need to be reviewed, keeping in mind the salient and valid points put forward in prior correspondence referenced above.

Under these circumstances, it would seem incumbent upon both Colleges concerned to reach an agreement -- due to either "admitted" advisement and/or "verifiable" grading irregularities assignable to both, irregularities now tangibly affecting my degree -- culminating in the neutralizing of the failing grade, or removal of it, and the course, from my records.

Sir, I would like to add this present correspondence to my appeal file, and look forward to a favorable decision from your office in light of the foregoing observations, all of which can be substantiated by the university officials whom I recently consulted.

Thanking you sincerely for your attention and consideration, I remain,

Yours most cordially,

Masaud Al-Qahtani