Gevorg Hakobyan is a third year law student at the French University. Not being able to defend his rights within the University itself, Gevorg has dared to raise the issues involved on the outside to the consternation of Grigor Badiryan, the Dean of the Law Faculty, who had lectured Gevorg that such matters should not leave the university confines. As a result, Dean Badiryan has stated that he would convene a conduct review committee to have Gevorg expelled from the University.

In February of this year Gevorg took an examination called “International Public Rights”. Upon reviewing the completed written exam Gevorg noticed that the instructor, Shahen Avagyan, had marked a question that he had solved correctly to be the incorrect answer. As a result, his grade went down by 5 points.

Gevorg states that, “I even went to a advice session at the State University. I am ready to defend my position with the appropriate reference material and with specialists who can attest to the correctness of my answer.” He has petitioned the school’s Administrative Board regarding the matter as well. The Board’s reply stated that according to the University’s examination statutes the student’s marks could not be altered.

According to Point 5.2 of the above-mentioned statute, “Only in the case of technical errors (incorrect addition, overlooking a certain question) can allow for the changing of exam grades.” Thus, it turns out that if a teacher incorrectly evaluates a student’s work, it’s the student that suffers.

“In order to maneuver around this ridiculous statute I specifically didn’t raise the demand to raise my grade in my petition. I only asked that my written exam be reviewed.” points out the future lawyer and notes that if after a review he is found to be correct his grade will automatically be raised.”
 
Gevorg has also handed in a second and third appeal. In the last one he dared to employ the term “demand” which the Rector of the University, Anne-Marie Schlosser found to be offensive. At the behest of Dean Badiryan, Gevorg apologized to Rector Schlosser for using such crude language.

Gevorg relates that, “After that incident Dean Badiryan told me that even though he couldn’t change my mark he promised that the matter would be solved internally, according to legal norms, and that my written exam would be reviewed. But nothing has happened since. It seems that every time I go to his office he’s otherwise engaged and the matter gets put off again and again.”

Some time later Gevorg handed in some course work on the same subject, “International Public Rights”. He states that this time too there were some incomprehensible markings under the same correct words and terminology. The instructor of the subject, Shahen Avagyan, in addition to two other instructors, including Dean Badiryan, graded his written course work.

Gevorg says that, “In order to find out which instructor graded my paper and what were the mistakes that I had made, I requested to be shown the marks given by each. I received a short message back from the interns working at the office stating, ‘Without the proper permission we are prohibited from showing the student the grading papers of individual teachers.’ This is in direct violation of the ‘freedom of information’ regulation. Here at the university they’ll only respond to your appeals if you really pester them and even then they’ll postpone the issue as long as possible. That’s why I decided to see the Rector personally. After making me wait for an hour when the Rector found out that it was me she said that we’ve already gone over this issue and then proceeded to throw me out of the office quite rudely.”

Gevorg notes that the Rector had no right to do so since according to the University’s charter the Rector is obliged to resolve any existing controversy between students and school employees. In fact this controversy, regarding a high or low grade, caused other consequences as well. According to the standards in operation at the French University, a given student’s status regarding tuition (tuition exempt or with a certain tuition reduction) is based on his/her yearly progress results. The three top students of any faculty are exempt from paying any tuition. The students occupying the next 3-4 spots are given tuition reductions of 75%, followed by 50% and 25%.

Based on Gevorg’s annual educational progress he occupies the 4th spot. As he relates, it was due to a similar misunderstanding that last year he missed out on coming in 3rd place by just 0,1 point. In addition, grades are very important when it comes to which students are selected to send to France to continue their education, etc. Accepted rumor at the University has it that those students in the top five spots have a good chance of going to France. 

Another student at the Law Department who wished to remain anonymous stated, “That’s why they’re already starting the selection process as to who will go to France. It’s clear that they want to send their people.” This student claimed that the University lacked a normal operating educational system and that it would loose its license if the place were investigated according to appropriate norms. The anonymous student went on to state, “The class schedule is changed every week. At the beginning of the week the schedule for only the next three days is announced, the rest of the week remains up in the air. The reason for this is that many of our instructors are judges, inspectors and members of the Justice Council; teaching a class is like a hobby for them. Everything at the school is arranged to suit the convenience of the teachers. That’s why for most of the day we students do absolutely nothing. It remains a mystery why we’re paying tuition at all?”

Students at the French University only have an approximate idea regarding what next year’s tuition will be. Based on past experience it is assumed that tuitions will rise by some 40,000-50,000 drams. In the contract that the University signs with every student it is noted that, “Annual tuition fees are formulated by the decision of the Board of Trustees.” (The President of the Board of Trustees is none other than Artur Baghdasaryan, leader of the Orinats Yerkir political party and Secretary of the National Security Council attached to the President - A.D.). 

This is a blatant violation of the ROA law regarding “Higher and post-graduate education” since the law stipulates that “in the contract signed between the student and the institution of higher learning the general amount of the forecasted tuition at every level in the given institution must be registered. The contract signed with the student, in addition to the general tuition amount therein noted, is not subject to change throughout the entire course of study.”

The Rector of the University, Anne-Marie Schlosser, refused to answer any of our queries on the matter claiming that she was “extremely busy”. She also pointed out that due to the start of the exam period she wouldn’t have the time to get back to us in the coming weeks as well. As for Grigor Badiryan, Dean of the Law Faculty, he responded with quintessential lawyer’s legalese that, “I’m not authorized to answer any of your questions.”