The Court of Appeal of Concepción accepted a security appeal filed by a student of a mixed postgraduate program at the University of Concepción to expel him from it.
The Appellant explained that he took admission in the Master of Ergonomics taught by the University, in which he initially faced no difficulties, but in the face of various events, which created a great physical and mental burden, his personal situation changed significantly. He was suffering from pneumonia and his condition deteriorated due to a case of Covid 19, due to which he could not deliver the program activities on time.
She further adds that she had to face stressful situations, such as her husband’s appendicitis operation, and a Siberian dog attack on her 10-year-old son, which caused severe injuries to his skull and face, so she had to do so. A difficult recovery process as a mother, and as a supporter of the family economy during that period.
He explains that due to the circumstances described, he fell behind on some payments, which caused him to be blocked from the student forum without the possibility of receiving study materials or knowing his progress in the assigned tasks.
Nevertheless, he explains that he attempted to pay monthly payments and finance the trip from Colombia to Concepción in order to complete individual internships and proceed to the third semester of his master’s degree.
She further adds that she obtained very good grades in many subjects, except for the Cognitive Ergonomics subject, in which she did not achieve a grade of 5.0 but instead obtained 4.7 as the final grade, making her the only student to be assessed with the said grade. were, and without explaining the reason for that grade, since, when requesting the evaluation guidelines, it was stated that the subject teacher had already provided feedback, which in fact had not happened.
Subsequently, she was informed of being removed from the Magisterium due to receiving an insufficient grade of 4.7 according to regulations that only she knew about at the time.
She believes that the university violates the guarantee of equality before the law and the principle of non-discrimination, as she claims that its treatment of her changed when she fell behind on payments to the university; And that his psychological integrity is also violated by not giving him improvement guidelines for the 2 assessments of the subject, which led to his exclusion from the programme, leading to depressive states, anxiety and symptoms of depression.
In its report, the university indicated that subject teachers who failed it immediately provided feedback for Recovery Test 1, making the said test program available on the platform.
He says that it is the duty of students to review their messages on the student forum according to the general rules of the Master’s degree in Ergonomics.
It mentioned that the Appellant had given his first recovery test in the beginning of March 2023 when his colleague was giving his last recovery test and on failing in his first attempt in the beginning of March, he had to give his second and last recovery test. Had to give. Third semester. As a result, he explains that the university took special consideration so that he could take the recovery assessment on different dates than his peers.
He says that the minimum grade to pass Ergonomics is 5.0, but while the Appellant received 4.2 and 2.9 grades in Recovery Tests 1 and 2, he did not reach the minimum grade.
The Court of Conception accepted the protection appeal. The ruling refers to the type of analysis that must be done in the present case, “which cannot ignore the gender perspective, since it involves a woman, a student, a physician by profession, a foreigner of Colombian nationality, a mother of two children. Is.” She is of age, pursuing postgraduate studies in Chile, which required her to travel by herself from her native Colombia to Concepcion, Chile, which is indicative of a more vulnerable situation, requiring her to take responsibility for her own care. Padi families, recover physically, contribute financially and continue to respond to the needs and commitments of students.
He further stated that “In this perspective, it is not possible to ignore that the plaintiff, as proved by the relevant medical information, remained on leave, suffering from pneumonia (…) as a result of which she could not carry out her activities. about which he was always informed, the consequences of which he had to suffer for many months; “he has a depressive condition, which affects his physical and mental integrity and that of his family group, which undoubtedly burdens him with the associated academic load. have experienced situations of extreme stress and conflict while trying to comply with the
He further adds that, “However, despite all these difficulties from which he was suffering, he was able to pass other subjects of the postgraduate degree, as stated in the curriculum report issued by the Director of Postgraduate on April 19, 2023 . Study. From the University of Conception”.
Then, he explains that “in this line of recognition of special treatments, there is the maternity protection system that derives from the principles and provisions that make up our legal system and which is also recognized in international instruments, which are implemented in different ways. Are introduced the areas of law in which it has a presence, the establishment of motherhood and paternity rights. In this sequence and linked to labor law, Law No. 20,545, in its Articles 195 and 201, provides for protection for motherhood, paternity and family life. Considers a statute. For its part, in the context of education, the General Education Law (Law No. 20,370) states in its Article 11 that: pregnancy and motherhood in any case of entry and stay in educational establishments of any level Shall not become a hindrance. Academic and administrative facilities should be provided that permit the accomplishment of both objectives.
For the Court, “the actions of the defendants (…) do not reflect an acceptable standard in terms of the protection and promotion of the principle of equality and non-discrimination in relation to maternal rights. In this sense, it should be noted that the defendant did not demonstrate that he gave her, as was his duty, special treatment and protection, as a woman, professional student, foreigner, mother of two minor children, She needed to continue and complete her postgraduate university studies, while also having to juggle health and parenting problems. On the contrary, precedents show that in order to make the right to equality and the rights to motherhood and education effective and real, the common law applies to the rest of the students, without the distinction that their situation requires.
In this sense, it states, “Despite the fact that the student informed the defendant about the health condition from which she suffered and her precarious economic situation (…) the defendant did not make any real and concrete contribution to her situation. The concern did not reflect, however, the constitutional and legal imperatives that made it appropriate.”
In view of the above, the Court allowed the appeal and ordered the University to adopt appropriate measures to reinstate the Appellant to the Master of Ergonomics, and to provide her with the opportunity and conditions to take the rigorous examination of the subject in which she failed. Was, which must be done. Be informed in time and provide relevant evaluation guidelines.
View the decision of the Conception Court