FaultyMario
March 26th, 2015, 09:02 PM
Ok, kiddos. Serious biznez here.
I need your bizarre energies and your Don Killuminati to devise a 'legal' strategy.
TL-DR - Was refused for a master's b/c I failed teh english. Dug up, Grades have been manipulated.
a) I applied to a master's in Sociology. It's a formally in the National Registry for Quality Graduate Studies, it is therefore a paid-to-study program.
b) I seem to recall there were more than 40 applicants. I was number 41 on the interview list.
c) For around 20 months, from 2008 to 2010, I was a research aide at the same institute. There's a lot of politics involved. I didn't publish much in my time there, but there's a couple of co-authoring credits. As part of my duties I was also a teaching assistant whenever the researchers I was assigned to nominated me, in that regard I taught introductory and intermediate-level classes. Between 2008 and 2014, I also reading comprehension of English texts to anthropology students for 5 semesters.
d) I had previously applied there in 2012, but was offered entrance sans scholarship. Refused the offer because I felt entitled to the same privileges as the rest of the students. Reason given for not being offered scholarship was that my gpa as an undergraduate was low. It is 7.97/10.0, federal funding rules-of-operation establish a minimum of 7.80/10.0, I did not know that at the time.
e) When the list of accepted applicants was published, I interviewed with the coordinator to seek an offer like the one I had had in 2012, but she was adamant, she stated that I had gotten very low grades in 2 exams (spanish and english).
f) Being told that I had low scores lit red lights. Because I'm not proud of my academic record, ever since graduating I have taken exams very seriously, and I've ALWAYS gotten +95%. For example, in 2002 I got 297/300 on the TOEFL CBT, in 2010 my combined TOEFL IBT scores were 114/120. This is not bragging, this is the truth, your honor!
g) I filed a formal request of information with the coordination in december, I have not gotten an answer yet.
h) In January i filed a formal complaint with the federal commission of science and technology, AKA The doodz with da benjamins, Y0. And i also made an inquiry asking for all documents used in the deliberative process thru the access to public information commission.
i) in late february I presented my case to the Human Rights Commission. I argued they violated my constitutional i) right to petition and ii) right to a dignified and fair treatment.
j) Today I -finally- got all documents used in the decision making process. And i got the following grades: interview and research project 7.5/10, spanish 5.5/10, english 7/10. Total 20/30.
k) As i stated above and on my letter to the science commission, against the association of public universities' policy, the exams where done in-house and graded by one person.
l) In one of the minutes I received as part of my public information query, it is stated that of the 3 published criteria, the english exam was voided because very few people passed it. Age and GPA criteria were added.
m) I know from conversations to the staff, that nobody except for the coordinator had access to the exams. And that people like me who didn't have a 8.0 GPA were dropped without a proper look at the grades. I also know that the top rated applicant is an american female who has asked to turn in her lecture reports in english because she is not proficient in spanish, she got 9.8 in her spanish test. There's also a student who got 9.5 in her spanish test that is currently getting 0 (yes, zero), in at least two classes; she had a letter of recommendation from the coordinator herself.
That's all I can remember ATM. Tomorrow I have an appointment with my Human Rights Visitor, what arguments can I use to unravel this travesty?
I need your bizarre energies and your Don Killuminati to devise a 'legal' strategy.
TL-DR - Was refused for a master's b/c I failed teh english. Dug up, Grades have been manipulated.
a) I applied to a master's in Sociology. It's a formally in the National Registry for Quality Graduate Studies, it is therefore a paid-to-study program.
b) I seem to recall there were more than 40 applicants. I was number 41 on the interview list.
c) For around 20 months, from 2008 to 2010, I was a research aide at the same institute. There's a lot of politics involved. I didn't publish much in my time there, but there's a couple of co-authoring credits. As part of my duties I was also a teaching assistant whenever the researchers I was assigned to nominated me, in that regard I taught introductory and intermediate-level classes. Between 2008 and 2014, I also reading comprehension of English texts to anthropology students for 5 semesters.
d) I had previously applied there in 2012, but was offered entrance sans scholarship. Refused the offer because I felt entitled to the same privileges as the rest of the students. Reason given for not being offered scholarship was that my gpa as an undergraduate was low. It is 7.97/10.0, federal funding rules-of-operation establish a minimum of 7.80/10.0, I did not know that at the time.
e) When the list of accepted applicants was published, I interviewed with the coordinator to seek an offer like the one I had had in 2012, but she was adamant, she stated that I had gotten very low grades in 2 exams (spanish and english).
f) Being told that I had low scores lit red lights. Because I'm not proud of my academic record, ever since graduating I have taken exams very seriously, and I've ALWAYS gotten +95%. For example, in 2002 I got 297/300 on the TOEFL CBT, in 2010 my combined TOEFL IBT scores were 114/120. This is not bragging, this is the truth, your honor!
g) I filed a formal request of information with the coordination in december, I have not gotten an answer yet.
h) In January i filed a formal complaint with the federal commission of science and technology, AKA The doodz with da benjamins, Y0. And i also made an inquiry asking for all documents used in the deliberative process thru the access to public information commission.
i) in late february I presented my case to the Human Rights Commission. I argued they violated my constitutional i) right to petition and ii) right to a dignified and fair treatment.
j) Today I -finally- got all documents used in the decision making process. And i got the following grades: interview and research project 7.5/10, spanish 5.5/10, english 7/10. Total 20/30.
k) As i stated above and on my letter to the science commission, against the association of public universities' policy, the exams where done in-house and graded by one person.
l) In one of the minutes I received as part of my public information query, it is stated that of the 3 published criteria, the english exam was voided because very few people passed it. Age and GPA criteria were added.
m) I know from conversations to the staff, that nobody except for the coordinator had access to the exams. And that people like me who didn't have a 8.0 GPA were dropped without a proper look at the grades. I also know that the top rated applicant is an american female who has asked to turn in her lecture reports in english because she is not proficient in spanish, she got 9.8 in her spanish test. There's also a student who got 9.5 in her spanish test that is currently getting 0 (yes, zero), in at least two classes; she had a letter of recommendation from the coordinator herself.
That's all I can remember ATM. Tomorrow I have an appointment with my Human Rights Visitor, what arguments can I use to unravel this travesty?