Student InformationYour guide to University life - expectations, information, contacts and more.
Course Leader for BA & MA Islamic Studies
Head of Research
Dr Haroon Bashir is Head of Islamic Studies at the Markfield Institute of Higher Education. He completed his PhD in Islamic Studies at the University of Leeds. His research, funded by the White Rose College of Arts & Humanities (WRoCAH), focused on discourses pertaining to slavery, race, and emancipation within the exegetical and legal traditions of Islam. Prior to this, Dr Bashir read an M.St in the Study of Religion (Dist.) at the University of Oxford and received his B.A in Arabic & Islamic Studies (I) from the University of Leeds.
Course Leader for BA & MA Islamic Studies with Education
Dr Imran Suddahazai is Head of the Education Studies at the Markfield Institute of Higher Education and a Visiting Associate Researcher at Lancaster University. After an academic hiatus that entailed senior leadership, management and coaching roles in diverse industries across the world, he completed his doctoral program in educational leadership from the University of Gloucestershire. His expertise includes media, public relations, international sports management and education. He holds a BSc in Computer Science from the University of Brunel, and an MSc in Global Politics, International Relations and Development from the University of London.
Course Leader for BA & MA Islam and Pastoral Care
Dr Rahmanara Chowdhury is a Lecturer in Islam and Pastoral Care at the Markfield Institute of Higher Education. She completed her undergraduate studies in Ergonomics at Loughborough University. She has a Masters in Psychology from Nottingham Trent University and completed her PhD at Brunel University, London. She was awarded ESRC funding to explore the issue of domestic violence and abuse within the UK Muslim population. She is the author of ‘Qawwamoon; Protectors and Maintainers’, and ‘Road to Recovery’, which is based on a faith-informed recovery programme she developed for survivors of domestic violence and abuse. Dr Chowdhury frequently delivers workshops, training and seminars relating to domestic violence and abuse and mental health.
Dr Faizal Manjoo BA, LLB, MA, PhD
Senior Lecturer in Islamic Studies/ Islamic Finance
Dr Faizal Manjoo obtained his BA (Hon) in Islamic Studies, LLB, Diploma in Advanced Labour Law and Diploma in Advanced Banking Law from the Rand Afrikaans University now known as the University of Johannesburg. He also has an MA in Islamic Banking, Finance and Management from Loughborough University and gained his PhD from the University of Gloucestershire. He graduated as an Aalim Faadhil through the Darse Nizami system from Madrassah Arabia Islamia (South Africa). Dr Manjoo also completed his Certificate in Mediation and Arbitration and also holds an Advanced Diploma in Management Studies from the University of Mauritius.
Senior Lecturer in Arabic Studies
Dr Mohammed Rafeek attained his PhD in Fiqh for Muslim minorities (fiqh al-aqaliyyat) from Porstmouth University in 2012 and has since been teaching Arabic and developing Islamic studies courses at the department of education and training at the Islamic Foundation. He joined MIHE as a lecturer in Islamic Studies and Arabic in 2018. Dr Rafeek completed his ‘Alimiyah training in Jami’ah Naleemiyah in Sri Lanka before coming to the UK, where he completed his BA, MA and PhD studies. In addition, he completed a Certificate in Muslim Chaplaincy. Dr Rafeek also conducts classes in Arabic and Islamic studies for young people aged 8-16 in Crawley and Leicester.
Lecturer in Islamic Studies
Dr Redhwan Karim joined Markfield Institute as a lecturer in Islamic Studies at the London and Birmingham campuses in 2021. He attained his BA (Hon), MA and PHd from SOAS. His research draws primarily on two strands of Qur’ānic content, the ayāt al-aḥkām (legal verses) and the qiṣaṣ (stories), as well as how these strands are informed in light of the tafsīr (exegetical) literature. He has delivered conferences on The Study of Qur’ānic Intratextuality, Gender Interaction in the Qur’ān: Synergy between the Ayāt al-aḥkām and the Qiṣaṣ and Gender Relations in the Qur’ān.
Lecturer in Islamic Studies
Dr Anees Lodhi completed his MA at Cambridge University and went on to complete his PhD in Islamic Studies at SOAS. His research is on The Concept of Hijra in Islamic Law: A Transgressional History. He joined Markfield Institute of Higher Education in 2021 lecturing in both the main campus and in Birmingham.
Lecturer in Islamic Studies
Ustadha Ameena Blake joined the Markfield Institute of Higher Education as a lecturer of BA Islamic Studies in September 2018. She completed her BA (hons) in English Studies from Sheffield Hallam University and undertook a Post Graduate in teaching followed by her MSc in Leadership and Management of Education. As well as working in educational leadership and consultancy, and teaching in mainstream education, she has studied and lectured in a range of Islamic institutions and completed her MA in Islamic Studies at MIHE.
Lecturer in Pastoral Care
Fatima joined the Markfield Institute of Higher Education in 2020 as a student support officer. She completed her BA in Islamic Studies, MA in Islam, Pastoral Care and Counseling at MIHE and is now a PhD candidate at KU Leuven in Belgium. She has completed her Masters in Research Methodologies at KU Leuven. She has become a familiar ally on campus of the student body, often helping with academic support and the student council.
Lecturer in Islamic Studies
Zahed Fettah completed his LLB Law degree from the University of Birmingham, a BA in Shari’ah Law from the European Institute of Human Sciences, and an MA in Islamic Studies from Newman University (Markfield Institute). His dissertation discussed the role of weak Hadith in the Hanbali legal school. He then completed two years of specialisation in Usul al-Ifta in the Ḥanafi legal school. His classical Islamic studies were firstly with scholars in the UK, then in Algeria where he studied Tafsir and Hadith at Dar al-Hadith in Oued Souf (Algeria). He holds ijazahs in various books of Aqidah, Hadith, Fiqh, and other Islamic sciences. He is currently a teacher, lecturer, and researcher in Islamic Studies. He has several published articles on legal (Fiqh) issues and other Islamic topics.
Prior to joining MIHE, Dr Zahid Parvez was a senior lecturer at the University of Wolverhampton, Business School. Dr Parvez has been an external examiner at Staffordshire University (for Oman delivery), Hertfordshire University and University of Wales Trinity Saint David. His PhD in E- democracy was from the University of Birmingham. His teaching interests include research methods, sustainable development, globalization, governance and democracy, cross-cultural management and e-business management. He has authored various papers published in international journals on e- democracy and problem-solving from an Islamic Perspective, as well as, written a book entitled, “Building a New Society: An Islamic Approach to Social Change”, Revival Publications.
Is one of the longest standing members of staff, Gaynor is responsible for the finance/HR at MIHE. She gained the Level 4 qualification with the Association of Accounting Technicians in November 2013. Her roles previously as bookkeeper and office administrator at The Islamic Foundation before joining MIHE were the starting point for a long and illustrious career.
Head of Academic Operations
Benjamin joined MIHE early 2020 as Head of Academic Operations. He holds a Master’s degree in Applied Linguistics from the University of Leicester and an MA in Islam & Sustainable Development. Before moving to Markfield, he lived in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia for seventeen years where he taught English at King Abdul-Aziz University and the University Of Business & Technology, also heading the English preparatory programme. On returning to the UK he got involved in the charity sector in Leicester. Benjamin is also the welfare officer and first-aider on campus.
Administrator for Outreach/ Alumni & Welfare Officer
Sarvat is a graduate of MIHE’s MA in Islamic Studies programme, and has worked periodically as an administrator for MIHE since 2008. Sarvat is also employed as a trainer for supplementary school teachers on the ‘Effective Teaching Skills’ course. She is responsible for the MIHE alumni and outreach programmes as well as a support/welfare officer for students on campus.
Office Administrator / Supervisor of Chaplaincy Programme & Dissertation Module
Ruqaiyah joined MIHE in 2010 to help with the Institute’s administration. Her academic background is in social policy, European studies and international security institutions. She is responsible for the administration of the PhD and Chaplaincy programmes and teaches academic writing skills. Ruqaiyah is also involved with research at the New Muslims Project and writes regular reviews for The Muslim World Book Review.
Shahama Rafeek BSc
Office Administrator / Admissions Officer
Shahama Rafeek joined the Markfield Institute of Higher Education in 2021. She completed her BSc in Psychology at Oxford Brookes University and is currently studying Islamic perspectives of Psychology and Counselling. In her spare time she also works as an editor for an Islamic life-coaching company and co-hosts online tutorials. Shahama is often the first point of contact for all students applying as the admissions officer as well as those attending the campus.
Israr Iqbal specializes in support services to educational institutions and organisations. He manages Networks and provides support across many of the institutions applications. In his spare time Israr practices Jiu-Jitsu.
Jack Winter started working as an IT apprentice alongside our full-time consultant and now having completed his Level 3 Apprentice qualification he continues to work in IT support. He has worked at improving the IT solutions for staff and students and has used his acquired skills and training to further build his practical knowledge in the field. Jack has been instrumental in setting up the new digital studio in the library as well as other technical improvements.
Abdul Hayee has worked in the library for the last 15 years and is currently responsible for the development and management of the library.
In establishing its academic misconduct policy, MIHE is seeking to maintain the integrity of its academic awards and procedures. It is incumbent on every student to hold themselves to account and maintain academic integrity throughout their higher education.
A student’s work submitted for assessment is expected to be their own. The Markfield Institute of Higher Education (MIHE) and Newman University (the degree awarding body) have very strict regulations regarding presentation of work for assessment for the award of the degree.
Academic misconduct includes plagiarism; cheating, collusion and attempting to obtain an unfair academic advantage are forms of academic misconduct and are entirely unacceptable for any student. Students who deliberately plagiarise, cheat or engage in fraudulent behaviour are characterised as threatening the values and beliefs that underpin learning, thus angering and discouraging other students. This devalues the integrity of awards and qualifications and distorts the efforts of lecturers who wish to teach rather than police student’s work.
Practices that compromise this principle include:
- The inclusion in a candidate’s work of another person’s work without the use of quotation marks and acknowledgement of sources (referencing)
- The summarizing of another person’s work by simply changing words or altering the order of presentation, without acknowledgements;
- Copying the work of another candidate, with or without the knowledge or agreement. If copied with the agreement of the other candidate both parties are guilty of
Plagiarism is defined as the unacknowledged use of the work of others. This means that students must not copy, closely follow, paraphrase or present another’s work as their own without acknowledgement. Material that must not be treated in this way includes, amongst other things, books, journals, the internet or other electronic sources, audio-visual resources, photographs, corporate literature, the work of other students, and any other material prepared by another individual but presented as if it were the student’s own;
Unauthorised collusion is defined as either working with other students to such an extent that the submitted assessments are similar or identical; or collaboration with one or more other persons to produce work which is then submitted as the work of one individual. Students must not extend authorised collaboration in group work to unauthorised collaboration with anyone outside the group. Within higher education, learning does not take place in isolation and is often a collaborative process. Such collaboration is a valuable component of the learning process. In assessment, however, it is important that the submitted work is that of the individual student, or a defined group of students, depending on the assignment set;
Re-presentation, which is defined as the submission of work presented previously or simultaneously for summative assessment at this institution or elsewhere. This means that work, or any substantial part of a piece of work, must not be submitted for assessment on more than one occasion unless authorised in writing by the Module Tutor. The definition does not apply to formative submissions, for example drafts submitted for comment; neither does it apply to previous submissions that failed to achieve academic credit. A student is normally permitted to refer to their own previous work in subsequent assignments, provided full references are given;
Fabrication is defined as the invention of data or other information for use in an assessment. This means that students must not invent or manufacture data, references, or other material and present them as bona fide products of empirical research.
Impersonation is defined as the attempt to gain an unfair advantage in assessment through means of false identification. This means that students must not permit another person to undertake an assessment on their behalf, or themselves undertake an assessment on behalf of another student;
Cheating in examinations is defined as the attempt to gain an unfair advantage by the use of dishonest means in an invigilated examination or test. This means that students must not communicate with, or copy from, another student, or introduce information from written, printed or electronic sources into the examination location unless this is approved as part of the rubric of the examination.
During the induction day, in the course handbook and in preparation for an assignment or assessment, students should have:
- Clear guidelines on what constitutes plagiarism that including examples;
- Information on copyright infringement;
- Advice on how to acknowledge sources;
- A signed learning agreement that all work submitted should be the student’s own endeavour (cover sheet);
- Guidelines on the extent to which students can collaborate on course
Tutors may suspect plagiarism if the following apply:
- The student’s work is markedly different from their normal style;
- The similarity report indicates a high percentage of copied text
- Two or more students’ work is very similar and has been submitted as individual work;
- The writing lacks coherence and passages are included with no clear context;
- Unacknowledged quotes from known sources can be collected by comparing the suspect piece of work with:
- Work previously presented by the student;
- A piece on a similar subject undertaken under controlled conditions;
- Other students’ writings where similarities occur;
- The sources the student seems to have plagiarized;
- The student’s performance when assessed
Procedures for investigating academic misconduct
Where it appears that the student has committed an offence of the types described above, the administration will invite the student to an investigative interview. The purpose of the investigative interview is for MIHE:
- To establish and record the case against the student and the student’s response;
- To come to a judgement, on the balance of probabilities, as to whether an assessment offence has been
- To gather all the evidence whereby the alleged offence concerns unauthorised collusion, a series of interviews with all students involved may be required to come to a judgement on the conduct of individual students.
Once an interview has been scheduled you will be asked to attend either in person at MIHE or online on a specific date/time by the Senior Administrator and the relevant course leader and concerned academic staff will also be in attendance. The student will be invited to attend the meeting and will be allowed to bring one other person for support. This could be a friend or a representative from the Students Council, but must not be a legal representative. In instances where the interview may be online this will be conducted through Google Hangouts. An invitation is sent via email and the student is expected to check their email and respond to the request.
The agenda for the interview will be:
- Introductions and explanation of the purpose of the interview;
- Details of the alleged offence (normally presented by the Module Tutor);
- Student’s response (if they so choose) – student may be questioned about their work; if they dispute the allegation, they should bring to the meeting their research notes, raw data or other materials which they consider will demonstrate that their work was indeed their own;
- Questions from the Chair, to clarify any points;
- The student’s adviser’s comments (if they so choose);
- The Chair’s summary of the facts and views
If the student is unable to attend the meeting, and unless they have a scheduled class or extenuating circumstances, the meeting will go ahead and a decision will be taken in their absence. In either case, they will be informed of the decision normally within 3 working days of the meeting.
For intentional misconduct, depending on the seriousness of the situation, the content and the demands of the particular syllabus, the penalties will be according to the validating university’s assessment regulations (broadly outlined below). Should an investigating committee, made up from senior academic and admin staff, find the student guilty of cheating/copying this will be recorded on their student file. This may have an impact on future academic references in support of continued study or employment.
First offence – This is logged on record as a formal caution: work will be marked according to the published assessment criteria, but the marking process will exclude the material deemed to have breached the regulations.
Second offence – Student will lose marks for the module and be recorded as “Academic Misconduct” which will remain on transcript; the module will be counted as a fail; student will have to re-take the module and pay the appropriate fee.
Third offence – Student will lose all marks for the module and be recorded as “Academic Misconduct” which will remain on transcript; student will be required to withdraw from the programme and from MIHE.
If a student denies the academic misconduct or wishes to appeal the decisions made against him/her, then MIHE’s appeals procedures will be applied.
MIHE has implemented the following formal mechanisms for students to provide feedback and offer suggestions for enhancing their learning experience:
End of Module Evaluation: This provides an opportunity for teachers and students to reflect on how modules are delivered and for students to provide feedback on a module’s management, resources, content, delivery and assessment. It also provides academic staff with an opportunity to reflect on student feedback and make any changes required in an effort to enhance students’ learning experience.
Student Course Representatives: Student Council, are representatives of the student body. Students choose their course representatives, who are then invited to a number of formal meetings for their input and feedback on modules, courses, and the Institute’s facilities and support services. Student representatives are briefed on their responsibilities and are encouraged to bring students issues to the attention of senior management of the Institute through formal structures. They are also invited to attend Academic Boards, where a review of all courses takes place. Student course representatives also become members of the Students Council, which acts as a students’ voice at the Institute. You can contact the student council by email email@example.com
Course Committee Meetings: These take place once per Academic Year. Students have an opportunity to discuss course issues with course leaders as well as comments from external examiners. The qualitative feedback and statistical data for modules and courses gathered through the module feedback and course committees is reflected on by course leaders and included in their response in Annual Monitoring reports (including annual programme reviews).Course leaders will lead the discussions and can be contacted by email.
Staff/Student Consultative Meetings: This is held once per Academic Year. All students are invited to these meetings. Students have an opportunity to discuss institutional level issues related to IT and library facilities, social events, time-tabling, general issues of assessments, deadlines, special workshops required to support learning, etc.
Dinner with the Rector: This is held once per Year. All students are invited to this informal dinner with the Rector Dr Zahid Parvez for a discussion. It is an opportunity to engage with the most senior staff member on campus. In all student affairs processes must be followed but on this occasion you may go straight to the top!
All written assignments must be submitted with the appropriate Cover Sheet (available on Moodle under ‘Further Information for Students’) online via Moodle/ Google Classroom on or before the deadline. Turnitin is an internet-based plagiarism detection service that automatically compares your submitted work to that of any other academic paper, article, book or internet content for similarity. Graded penalties will start applying immediately after 3pm (or the specified time set) on the submission date. All Moodle submissions (with the exception of the Similarity Checker) are FINAL and cannot be undone.
Assignments submitted via email will NOT be accepted and will be recorded as a ‘Non- submission FAIL’ result, unless:
a student is experiencing issues submitting their work on Moodle, they must send an email with screenshot to firstname.lastname@example.org and attach their work to it. Email submissions without photo evidence will NOT be accepted, and will be recorded as a ‘Non-submission FAIL’ result.
All Presentations will be taken in the assigned classrooms at the date and time specified, overseen by two markers. The deadline for submitting your PowerPoint presentation slides and notes to Moodle is before the presentation date and time. PowerPoint presentation slides and notes submitted after the presentation has been done will receive graded penalties as outlined below, starting at 5% immediately after the presentation takes place.
The pass mark for a module at levels 4, 5, and 6 is 40%. The pass mark for modules at Level 7 is 50%. A student will pass a module if all items of assessment have been submitted and have achieved the relevant pass mark (or compensated pass – as explained below), with the student clear to proceed to the next stage of their programme of study.
When the submission deadline is reached the assignment remains open for seven days after the deadline for late submissions. Late submissions would receive a maximum pass mark with penalties applied or if the penalty applied result is a below the minimum of 40% for undergraduate modules or 50% for postgraduate modules then the minimum pass mark will apply.
Penalties for late submission are as follows:
1 day late: – 5% marks
2 days late: – 10% marks
3 days late: – 15% marks
4 days late: – 20% marks
5 days late: – 25% marks
6 days late: – 30% marks
7 days late: – 35% marks After: FAIL
Work submitted more than 7 (seven) calendar days late will not be accepted and therefore will be recorded as a ‘Non-submission FAIL’ result.
Graded penalties do not apply to examinations or in-class presentations. Graded penalties also do not apply to late submissions of assessments where extensions have been granted (i.e. Extenuating Circumstances) or Re-sits.
Rules of Compensated Pass
At levels 4, 5 and 6, if the overall mark for a module is 40% or more, and any one other component of that module is less than 40%, but at least 35% or more, it will be recorded as a Compensated Pass and no re-sit will be allowed.
This rule applies solely to undergraduate programmes of study and does not apply to re-sits. It complies with Newman University’s policy and is reviewed annually.
If a student receives a ‘FAIL’ result on one or more assessments, he/she will have two subsequent attempts to re-submit their work during the prescribed reassessment period, according to the relevant Student Calendar (available on Moodle).
If deemed a ‘Pass’, the student’s work will receive a maximum mark of 40% for an undergraduate student and 50% for a postgraduate student.
For each assessment, a student will have a maximum of 3 attempts total.
Extenuating circumstances are circumstances beyond a student’s control, which affect his/her ability to attend classes, study or complete assessments by the set deadlines. Students must inform the Institute’s Administration Office (email@example.com) as soon as they are faced with any such circumstances. These circumstances:
- Must be out of the student’s control – the student could not have prevented them.
- Must have had an impact – they must have had a demonstrably negative impact on the student’s ability to study or to undertake an assessment.
Extenuating circumstances which may result in late submissions or where the student feel their work may be of a lower quality due to their health, must be reported to the Administration Office prior to the submission date. If a student is ill, he/she may request an extension on his/her coursework. Although most Extenuating Circumstances involve the student directly (illness or injury), serious illness of a close relative may also be taken into account. All extenuating circumstances, however, must be supported by evidence e.g. medical evidence in the case of illness.
Factors which affect a student’s ability to complete an assessment to the normal schedule may be defined as Extenuating Circumstances. What does and does not constitute ‘Extenuating Circumstances can be found below:
What does not constitute Extenuating Circumstances (see below)
- Accommodation disturbances
- Misreading the assessment deadline / examination timetable
- Paid employment or voluntary work
- Exam stress: Feeling ‘below par’, stressed and anxious leading up to and during an assessment(s) is a common experience of many students. It is not considered to be an acceptable extenuating circumstance unless a medical diagnosis of illness has been made.
- IT and/or computer failure, or withdrawal of IT facilities or suspension for reason of debt: Loss or corruption of files is not an acceptable extenuating circumstance. It is the student’s responsibility to ensure that all work which is electronically stored, generated and/or submitted is sufficiently backed up.
- Criminal conviction: If a student is convicted of a criminal offence any disruption caused by the investigation or sentence is not an acceptable extenuating circumstance.
- Unforeseen and unavoidable work pressures sufficiently serious so as to interfere significantly with the ability to meet an assessment deadline or physically preventing you from sitting an examination.
Any difficulties which might have been predicted, such as the strain of a long commute, or the tiredness resulting from the combination of a job or raising a family with a course of study, do not constitute extenuating circumstances. There are a few exceptions in relation to foreseen absence during examinations.
Failure of computer equipment, computer breakdown, no back up of work and printer failure or similar reasons will not constitute legitimate grounds for late submission of the course work. The following are additional examples of unacceptable circumstances for the Institute to give extensions to assessment deadlines. These examples are given for general guidance and are not exhaustive, definitive or prescriptive. All cases will be considered on an individual basis.
Transport issues: However, transport difficulties of an unpredictable and uncontrollable nature, where alternative arrangements could not be made within reasonable time and where independent evidence (such as accident report) can be provided. Only applies to examinations, presentations or time-constrained assignments.
What does constitute Extenuating Circumstances (see below)
- Family illness: A medical certificate/letter from an independent medical professional confirming the nature and severity of the family circumstances and the likely impact it is having on the student’s ability to undertake formal assessment and/or study.
- Bereavement: A death certificate or a letter confirming the death from an independent person (usually not a family member) with their contact details provided and including a view on the closeness of the relationship.
- Domestic disruption: Where significant and unforeseen domestic disruption has occurred very close to a timetabled examination a letter from an appropriate independent individual/authority detailing the relevant circumstances and an indication of the likely impact with their contact details provided. This applies only in relation to examinations unless the circumstances are exceptionally severe and extended. Disturbances caused by housemates would generally be considered to be normal and therefore not acceptable as an extenuating circumstance.
- Jury Service (UK)
- Court Attendance (UK): Where a student is required to attend a tribunal or court as a witness, defendant or plaintiff the student should provide official correspondence from the tribunal/court confirming attendance or a solicitor’s letter detailing the nature and dates of the legal proceedings and the requirement for the student to attend.
- Other: The list of circumstances cannot be exhaustive and it is possible that other circumstances will arise that should be considered as acceptable.
What to remember. The examples of circumstances above are likely to be acceptable as they fall under ‘unavoidable’. These examples are given for general guidance and are not exhaustive, definitive or prescriptive. All cases will be considered on an individual basis.
They are evidenced. A claim of extenuating circumstances can only be accepted if independent evidence is submitted. This must be one of the following, and must include contact details for verification:
- Medical certificate
- Police report or similar professional report
- Letter from third party confirming death of a relative, or death certificate
- Other—if the student cannot provide the above, they must have agreement on alternative form of evidence from the Office.
The form is submitted on or before the coursework deadline / date of the examination and the evidence is provided on that date or as soon as possible thereafter; evidence presented after the end of the relevant semester will not usually be accepted.
Claims which do not meet all the above criteria will not be accepted.
Apply by filling in the form (Extenuating Circumstances form available on Moodle under ‘Further Information for Students). Apply on or before the date the coursework assessment is due / examination is scheduled.
Attach the independent evidence which supports the claim, and submit this to the administration at firstname.lastname@example.org
If an extension on examination is agreed, attend the examination the next available time. This will normally be in the re-assessment examination period.
A request for an extension and/or evidence does not, in itself, guarantee that approval will be given. If approval is given, the Board of Examiners will make a record of it. If students require further advice on this, they can contact the Office or their Course Leader. Students should check that their circumstances meet the criteria specified in the detailed definition.
If the extenuating circumstances are of a long-term or complex nature, which will affect a student’s ability to study for a period longer than three weeks, the administration staff will normally ask the concerned student to consult with the Head of Academic Operations. The Head of Academic Operations will advise Course Leaders (or other staff who can offer support) of your circumstances and, with them, work out the best course of action. They will co-ordinate the support you need and review your case at intervals, to ensure you are making reasonable progress. It may be recommended in exceptional cases, that you suspend your studies.
The processes for supporting students with extenuating circumstances are not the same as the procedures for disabled students. The procedures for disability also apply to students with a specific learning difficulty such as dyslexia, dyspraxia or dyscalculia. A disabled student may have (for instance) an automatic extension on written coursework to take into account their disability upon receiving their form well in advance of the assessment dates; however, they could request a further extension as a result of (for instance) an illness which is unrelated to their disability. However, a student cannot claim an extenuating circumstances extension on the grounds of their disability. If their disability warrants an automatic extension, this must be arranged via the procedures for disabled students.
The following points are important to note:
- Throughout the semester, students will be required to demonstrate their engagement with the coursework which will be taken into consideration by the members of extenuating circumstances panel when making a decision. Those students who, for instance, did not show satisfactory level of engagement with their written coursework during the semester and apply for mitigation before or on the day of deadline, their application for extension may be rejected. The decision will be made at the discretion of the panel.
- In view of the above point, students who have an emergency situation and cannot meet the assessment deadlines ( for course work only) might be asked to submit their draft work to make sure they have made sufficient progress and that they could not complete due to the emergency situation. As a guideline, the Institute might ask students to submit the following percentage of completed work with their emergency extenuating circumstance application:
3 days prior to assessment deadline (70% of completed work)
2 days prior to assessment deadline (80% of completed work)
1 day prior to assessment deadline (90% of completed work)
The above only applies to course work and not for examinations, class presentations or time-constrained assignments.
Under no circumstances should a student approach individual admin, staff or module tutors/course leaders for extensions to deadlines.
MIHE values the views of its students, and therefore aims to manage complaints in a way that is sensitive to the needs of each specific case and supportive of MIHE’s goal of providing an exceptional student experience.
There are a number of informal channels through which it is hoped that most problems can be resolved. If, however, you need to pursue a complaint formally, you can be sure that MIHE will treat it seriously and impartially, on the basis set out in this section.
What complaints can be considered?
Grounds for complaint might include:
- Dissatisfaction with standards of the academic provision (for example, the basic academic framework such as course design, content and structure, resources and facilities, arrangements for assessment and information provided to you about your course)
- Dissatisfaction with the quality of supervision and tuition
- Deficiencies in standards of service (which might include problems with support facilities such as administrative services)
- Harassment, bullying and victimisation
- Other deficiencies in the quality of your learning experience
Complaints and Grievance Procedure
The formal procedure only applies to complaints initiated by an individual student, or by a student representative on behalf of the group of students.
Generally, complaints are most easily resolved if they are raised at the time the problem first occurs and with the person/s directly involved. Often, the complaint may be resolved simply by discussing it with a relevant staff member. If a student cannot, or feels unable to resolve the concerns in this way, he/she should put the complaint in writing to the Head of Academic Operations by emailing email@example.com
Written complaints from students should include the following information:
- Name and student ID number
- Details of the relevant programme/course
- Details of the main issue of concern
- An outline of any informal discussions that have already taken place to resolve the Please include the names of any staff involved and any relevant dates.
- A summary of the resolution/outcome being sought any other supporting information (for example, copies of correspondence which illustrates the complaint).
The complaint or grievance will be acknowledged within five working days of receipt by the Head of Academic Operations or his/her nominee.
Following investigation, the complaints and grievance committee will either
- Seek to resolve the complaint informally through mediation, or by making further enquiries at a local level
- Uphold the complaint as a whole or in part and take action accordingly
- Dismiss the complaint if the complaint is found to have no basis or grounds
- Dismiss the complaint if it is judged to be trivial, vexatious or malicious (and take further action if appropriate towards the complainant).
Complex cases may, unavoidably take longer to investigate. The student complainant will, in any event, be kept informed of the progress of any investigation.
MIHE aims to balance the rights of the student complainant and those of any person complained against; all parties must be treated with dignity and respect. A student should not expect to suffer any reprisals for making a complaint in good faith, and any evidence of recrimination should be brought immediately to the attention of the Rector. If, however, a complaint which is not upheld is found to have been made maliciously, the student concerned may be subject to disciplinary procedures.
A complainant does, have the right to be accompanied and supported at any hearing meeting by a friend or advisor. The complaints and grievances committee may take the following actions against the concerned student(s)/staff if the complaint is upheld:
- Issue an informal warning
- Issue a formal written warning which will be recorded in the student’s or staff member’s personal record
- Suspend the studies of the student(s) where the matter is serious enough to justify such action
- Suspend the member(s) of staff where specified in the Employee Handbook where the matter is serious enough to justify such action
The aggrieved person may appeal to the Rector against the decision of the complaints and grievance committee, stating clearly in writing the grounds for the appeal. The decision of the Rector shall be binding.
MIHE Building Layout
|Ground Floor||Room No.|
|Ladies Toilets||Ground floor hall|
|First Floor||Room No.|
|Lecture Rooms||MU1, MU2 and MU4 & 5|
|PhD Research Room||MU3|
|Mens’ Toilets||Upstairs landing|
|Fire Escape||Upstairs landing|
|Academic Staff Offices||MU6 – MU12|
The building is for use of both students and staff. Please help to keep MIHE clean and tidy at all times. No food or drink (apart from bottled water) to be consumed anywhere on the premises apart from the designated cafeteria area.
The PhD research room is for use by PhD research students only. The building will be locked daily at 9.00pm. Please ensure you vacate the building by this time.
We want to make sure that you are safe while you are at MIHE. The Admin Office, during induction session will tell you about our health and safety rules and things you must and must not do.
We test the fire alarms regularly, usually every Friday. Your tutor will tell you the difference between a test and a real fire alarm. If you or on campus and hear the fire alarm when it is not being tested, you must leave the building immediately. Walk briskly; do not run. Your tutor or other staff will tell you which door to use. Do not use any lifts. If you cannot use the stairs, your tutor will tell you what to do. Please do not return to the building until your tutor or the fire marshal tells you it is safe.
Where Do I Go If There Is A Fire?
Leave by the nearest fire exit (signposted) and report to your tutor on the lawn in front of MIHE’s building sign. Your tutor will call the register to make sure everyone is safe, so please do not leave the area. Do not go back into MIHE’s building until the fire marshal says it is safe to do so.
Students can inform MIHE during their interview, when they enroll/on induction, and at any time that they have a disability or on-going medical condition (including a mental health difficulty). This will help MIHE give students the support they need. Such information is kept confidential and MIHE will not divulge this information without a student’s permission. If necessary, reasonable accommodations can be made for students as described in the relevant Assessment of Disabled Students: Procedures for Students section of this handbook. Your health care will be provided by doctors (General Practitioners, known as GPs) located in surgeries close to where you will be living. It is essential that you register with a doctor soon after you arrive.
You must not smoke or vape inside any of the buildings on campus. This is not just MIHE’s rule, it is the law.
Please eat and drink only in the cafeteria. Do not bring food or drinks inside the lecture rooms, to the library or the computer room.
You should insure your personal property against loss or theft as soon as possible after arriving. Banks and other insurance companies also provide insurance for personal possessions and computers. MIHE Management does not take responsibility for loss or damage to personal property.
The Markfield Institute of Higher Education (MIHE) takes seriously its moral and legal responsibility to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all staff, students, visitors and the wider community who interact with the Institute, or access its services, grounds and facilities. All individuals within MIHE (staff, students, volunteers, visitors) have a role and responsibility to help ensure the safety and welfare of vulnerable adults.
Safeguarding is understood as the act of protecting people’s health, wellbeing and human rights, and enabling them to live free from harm, abuse and neglect. This policy sets out the arrangements MIHE will implement to discharge its duty to provide a safe and secure environment, to prevent abuse, and to respond appropriately to suspected or reported abuse of young people (under-18s) and vulnerable adults during their engagement with the Institute. The policy includes face-to-face activities and those delivered online.
The Institute will make this policy accessible to all staff, students, volunteers and visitors (via Moodle, noticeboards and the website).
All references to staff or adults includes teaching and administrative staff, volunteers working at the Institute and visitors in direct contact with students and staff, regardless of position, role or responsibilities. This policy adapts the reactive as well as preventative approach in keeping young people and adults safe.
Whilst the majority of our staff and student population are adults, a small minority could possibly commence their studies while under the age of 18. A number of our students may also be defined as ‘adults at risk of harm or abuse’ within a safeguarding context. Similarly, our workforce may include adults who are at risk of harm or abuse within a safeguarding context, or third parties may exist linked to our workforce or students where safeguarding concerns arise, for example a family member, child or other dependent, a friend or acquaintance. In addition, young people from schools visit the campus during open days.
Adults who may be at risk are defined by the government as people 18 years of age and above, who receive assistance or support in the form of a Regulated Activity. ‘Regulated Activity’ includes health care; personal care; social work; daily assistance; teaching, training or instruction and advice or guidance provided mainly for children. In the context of Higher Education, MIHE also recognises that there may be adults within the Institute’s community who may be at risk but who fall outside the government definition of Regulated Activity.
The Institute aims:
- To provide a safe environment for all adults to learn, develop and reach their full potential
- To identify people who are experiencing, or likely to experience significant harm, or are at risk of being drawn into radicalization/terrorism (see MIHE’s Prevent Duty Policy)
- To provide pastoral support where students feel secure, valued and listened to
The Institute seeks to safeguard children and vulnerable adults, and will:
- Ensure that information about safeguarding is disseminated
- Provide training to staff, students and volunteers about safeguarding and how to report concerns. MIHE will ensure that staff, students and volunteers receive instruction on how to create a safe environment. All staff and volunteers will be subject to safe recruitment procedures and will also be updated with any relevant legislation, policies and procedural changes.
- Take active measures to identify and prevent anyone who is unsuitable to work with vulnerable groups or individuals. We will promote safe staff and volunteer recruitment strategies, ensuring all necessary checks are
- Manage an effective internal process for dealing with reported
- Keep accurate and secure records of concerns about individuals, even when there is no need for immediate referral to outside
- Signpost – to external agencies where further guidance and support for anyone who may experience abuse can be
- Work with our validating universities and relevant external agencies where necessary in order to implement and monitor the activities regulated by this policy.
- Review policy and supporting processes
MIHE takes seriously its responsibility to ensure the safety and wellbeing of students, staff and the wider community. The Institute aims to prevent any member of the MIHE community from being drawn into terrorism. At the same time, MIHE also has a responsibility to protect academic freedom and general freedom of expression. Some of the ways in which the Institute can meet these responsibilities are set out in its policy which can be found on Moodle.
Bullying, harassment and victimisation of any individual will not be tolerated. Any allegations of such behaviour will be investigated, and ultimately disciplined, in accordance with the Bullying and Harassment Policy. Any form of discrimination against any individual is not tolerated. This includes, but is not limited to, discrimination because of age, disability, gender, race, religion and belief, and sexual orientation.
Bullying is defined as: ‘Unwanted, offensive, intimidating, malicious or insulting behaviour, an abuse or misuse of power through means intended to undermine, humiliate, denigrate or injure the recipient’ (ACAS, Bullying and harassment at work: a guide for managers and employers London: Acas, 2014, page 1).
Typically, bullying is one person targeting another, or a group of people targeting an individual. Bullying can also occur in less obvious scenarios and outside of traditional power relationships, for example, a member of staff may be bullied by a student or a manager by a member of staff. The following are examples of what may constitute bullying:
- Verbal e.g. threatening shouting, swearing or sarcasm
- Physical e.g. hitting or pushing
- Humiliation e.g. belittling a person
- Unfair treatment e.g. blaming a person for someone else’s mistake
- Unreasonable fault finding or criticism
- Giving the cold shoulder e.g. blanking or ignoring the
- Threatening or abusive comments made by email or through internet forums
This list is not intended to be exhaustive and bullying can take other forms.
Harassment is defined as:
- ‘Unwanted conduct that has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for the complainant, or violating the complainant’s dignity’ (Equality Act 2010: section 26 (para. 1-5)).
- Unwanted physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct which may (intentionally or unintentionally) violate a person’s dignity or create an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment which interferes with an individual’s learning, working or social
- Use of threatening, abusive, insulting words or behaviour, disorderly behaviour or the display of any writing, sign or other visible representation which is threatening, abusive or insulting, and which is likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress;
- Unwanted conduct of a sexual nature (sexual harassment); treating a person less favourably than another person because they have either submitted to, or did not submit to, sexual harassment or harassment related to sex or gender ”
Some examples include:
- Sexual harassment e.g. innuendoes, unwanted body contact, shocking or subtle body language.
- Racial and religious harassment e.g. threats or abuse directed at someone because of their faith and creed, colour, race or ethnic origin: Racial Harassment can include jokes in reference to a person’s race, religion, or nationality. It can include offensive remarks about dress, culture and customs which attempt to ridicule and create prejudice towards individuals or groups.
- Religious stereotyping and profiling – comments may not necessarily be directed at an individual, but may consist of a general culture which is intolerant of another person’s religion or beliefs.
- Ageism e.g. belittling or insulting someone or his/her abilities because of their
- Harassment because of disability e.g. ridiculing or treating an individual differently because of their disability – e.g. mimicking a disability or making offensive references to an individual’s appearance, behaviour or speech; further excluding people from activities due to their
This is not a definitive list as harassment is often specific to the person.
Sex-based harassment means harassment of a woman or man based on the person’s gender, while sexual harassment means unwanted behaviour of a sexual nature that is either based on someone’s sex or gender reassignment. For an act to be considered sexual harassment it does not matter what sex the perpetrator or the victim are for example male/male, male/female, female/female, or what the sexual orientation of those individuals is.
Victimisation occurs: where one person treats another less favourably because he or she has asserted their legal rights in line with the Act, has helped someone else to do so, or is suspected of doing so or intending to do so.
The Equality Act 2010 defines unacceptable behaviour as prohibited conduct in terms of: Direct discrimination; indirect discrimination, harassment and victimisation.
Dignity for all: All staff, students and the wider community of MIHE have a right to be treated with dignity and respect, in an environment free from all forms of bullying, intimidation, harassment and victimisation.
Our commitment: The Institute encourages participation, openness, creativity and innovation. MIHE aims to promote a working and learning environment and culture in which differences are respected, unacceptable behaviour is addressed and where individuals have the confidence to deal with harassment and bullying; being supported in that endeavour without fear of reprisals or victimisation.
The Institute has zero tolerance of bullying and harassment behaviour between members of our community. Where evidence supports an allegation, appropriate disciplinary action will be taken against any individuals responsible for perpetrating such behaviour in order to create an environment where individuals have the confidence to complain of harassment without fear of intimidation or reprisals. It is the responsibility of all members of the MIHE’s community to behave professionally, courteously and respectfully towards each other.
We will take particularly seriously any cases involving the abuse of a position of authority. All complaints (informal or formal) will be treated confidentially. Information shall only be divulged on a need to know basis and with the knowledge of the complainant. We will treat seriously all complaints of harassment and bullying made within the framework of this policy in a sensitive and fair manner with due regard for the confidentiality of all involved. Specifically, no one will be considered ‘at fault’ until an investigation has been fully conducted.
No one will be adversely affected in their studies, employment or opportunities for progression, promotion or training by making a complaint in good faith of alleged unacceptable behaviour. However, if the Institute finds that a complaint is malicious or made for reasons that are not genuine, it may take disciplinary action.
Training: Provide information and training in the operation of this policy and procedure for those responsible for providing support to students, and staff in management and supervisory roles.
The Markfield Institute of Higher Education (MIHE) is committed to supporting students` wellbeing and recognises that a positive approach to the management of physical and mental health issues is critical to student learning, academic achievement and to the wider student experience.
Definition: Fitness to study relates to an individual’s capacity to participate fully and satisfactorily as a student. It is not limited to academic progress but also related to living life independently with dignity. We acknowledge that social, physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing is crucial for a student’s learning and achievement and, that students may face adverse circumstances involuntarily during their studies at MIHE.
MIHE recognises that there may be instances where a student’s physical or mental health may give rise to concerns about the student’s fitness to study, for example, the student’s capacity to engage with his/her studies and/or to function more broadly as a member of the Institute’s wider community. Such instances may arise where, for example, the Institute expresses concern that:
- A student poses a risk to his/her/ own health, safety and/or wellbeing and/ or that of others
- A student’s behaviour is (or is at risk of) adversely affecting the teaching, learning and/or experience of other students
- A student’s behaviour is (or is at risk of) adversely affecting the day‐to‐day activities of the Institute or a placement provider
- A student’s support requirements fall outside the scope of the support and other services which the Institute can reasonably be expected to provide
MIHE staff dealing with affected students will consider what support may be offered to them, both from within the Institute (e.g. through our welfare support system, via an individual learning plan agreement) and externally (e.g. directing or referring students to local GPs or mental health services). Students will be encouraged to seek support.
Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to provide a suitable and coordinated response by academic and administrative support staff for any students:
- whose achievement and progress are hindered due to any of the above circumstances
- when other internal procedures such as extenuating circumstances procedures are not appropriate
- when all other avenues within the Institute have been explored
This policy should be applied when a student’s fitness to study is a cause for concern and all other procedures or options have been considered or exhausted. It is to be used as a last resort. A student’s fitness to study may be a cause for concern as a result of a wide range of circumstances, including (but not restricted to) the following:
- Behaviour which would usually be dealt with as a disciplinary matter, which may arise from, or suspected to be the result of, an underlying physical or mental health
- A student’s health difficulties are adversely affecting the health, safety or wellbeing of themselves or
- A student’s academic performance is unsatisfactory and may arise from, or suspected to be the result of, an underlying physical or mental health
- A student’s behaviour at their place of residence is adversely affecting the student and people in proximity to them. This calls into question the student’s ability to live independently in their accommodation.
Informal action: The staff will approach a student once concerns regarding his/her fitness to study have been raised and an informal attempt will be made to address these. The student will be encouraged to access the academic and welfare support services offered by MIHE.
Once concerns have been raised/ identified, the relevant administrative staff along with the Course Leader (or equivalent) should expedite a meeting with the student. At this meeting, a clear explanation will be given to the student regarding the concerns raised. The meeting will be conducted in a sympathetic and supportive manner. The student may be accompanied by a fellow student or representative of their own choice. The meeting will attempt to identify any underlying causes for the concerns raised and determine if any adjustments can be made to alleviate these concerns.
An action plan should be determined and agreed with the student, including setting specific review dates. Further informal meetings will convene on these scheduled review dates to determine if the concerns previously raised are being resolved. A copy of the action plan will be sent to the student and his/her Course Leader.
Effective communication recorded between staff will be important to achieve informal resolution of the concerns regarding fitness to study. The majority of cases can be resolved via such procedures. However, where this does not facilitate ‘fitness to study’ for the student then the procedures outlined below will apply.
Case Review: This stage engages a ‘Case Review Panel’ comprising of academic and administration staff who will enact early intervention measures and take positive informal action with the student’s co-operation and involvement. The Panel may seek advice from the validating University (Newman University) at this stage.
The Panel should invite the student to discuss the areas of concern and assess the student’s fitness to study. A medical assessment of the student may be required which can usually be obtained from the student’s GP or medical practitioner. This will allow any decisions about the case to be taken. The student will be able to submit documents to the Panel for consideration and will be permitted to attend all or part of the Panel meeting, at the Chair’s discretion. If the student decides to attend, they have the right to bring a friend or representative to the meeting.
The Panel will seek to identify suitable steps forward which serve the best interests of the student, balanced with the best interests of other members of the Institute. A letter/email will be sent to the student following the meeting detailing any decision taken and its reasons. The decision of this ‘Case Review Panel’ will form an outcome that was not previously suggested at the ‘Informal Action’ stage. The Panel may decide:
- That no further action is
- To monitor the student formally for a specific period of time by a mentor who will support an action plan agreed with the student.
This action plan will either contain more detailed steps to those included in previous plans stipulated in the ‘Informal Action’ stage or provide new strategies which are agreed by the Panel and the student. At this stage the student will be informed of the consequences for breaching the action plan, which will normally involve their case moving to a ‘Suspension of Studies’ designation for a short period of time.
The Panel will convene in the student’s absence if the student chooses not to attend, or, despite all reasonable attempts, the Institute has not been able to contact the student. If the student is able to provide good reason for their absence, the meeting will be rescheduled as soon as possible.
Fitness to Study Panel: This stage will apply only where all previous attempts to support the student have been unsuccessful, including where the student has little insight regarding their fitness to study or where there is evidence of a serious risk to the health and safety of the student or others at the institute. This course of action will be applied when it is considered that suspension, or requirement to withdraw may be the appropriate course of action, or where the student has not agreed to a recommendation or action plan.
The Panel may decide:
- To suspend studies either temporarily or permanently
- To review a decision to suspend at the request of the
A student who is subject to a temporary suspension may not be allowed to enter the Institute’s premises and/or take part in any activities on campus. A student will be designated as ‘suspended’ on MIHE’s internal data system and the validating University (Newman University) will be informed.
Return to study: The Panel will convene to decide if the student is fit to ‘return to study.’ Relevant medical evidence will be requested from the student regarding their ability to recommence their studies and to fulfil any course requirements and, where applicable, live independently in student accommodation. A student will only be permitted to return if, after considering medical evidence, the Panel is satisfied that the individual is fit to study.
Right of appeal: The student has a right to ‘Appeal’ against the Panel’s decision to suspension or withdrawal of studies. The letter/email of ‘Appeal’ should state the grounds of appeal and should be sent within 20 days of the date that the decision was taken.
The appeal will be heard by a committee comprising staff members who have not previously been involved in any stages of the case. The committee will be given a case report prior to meeting with the student, to allow an independent informed decision to be made. The Principal will chair this meeting and any decision made by the committee will be final.