IN A SHOCK decision on Tuesday, a high court judge ruled that Oxford University had the right to exclude a graduate student from receiving any tuition.
Nadeem Ahmed, from Hertford College, had brought the University to Court after the Oriental Institute refused to provide him with a tutor, effectively ending his academic career. The move came after Ahmed had sat and supposedly failed two "informal tests", which he claims he had been told would not have any effect on the continuation of his course.
Ahmed thought Oxford would be a "tranquil oasis" at which to study for an M.Phil in Mediaeval Arabic Thought in October 1998. Previously he had studied Arabic as his undergraduate degree at the University of London, where he was described as a proficient pupil. His Oxford supervisor Dr Fritz Zimmermann, however, took a different view. Labelling him "uneducated" and "not cut out for academia", he forced Ahmed to take an end of year "informal test" along with two other students, including one woman who had never previously studied Arabic. Zimmermann both set and marked the papers - Ahmed was the only one to be told he had failed. This, as well as a second exam that Ahmed was asked to take, and which contained material not previously studied, was judged "flawed" by Richard Jenkyns, then Senior Proctor.
Nadeem Ahmed refused to take a further "qualifying exam" in January 2000, and it was on this basis that the university decided to exclude him. Ahmed felt it was unfair for him to have to resit the exam so long after it was originally set. Throughout MIchaelmas 1999, he had had just one tutorial, despite the "over 300 phone calls" Ahmed said his moral tutor, Tom Paulin, made to the Oriental Studies institute.
The main thrust of Ahmed's case concerned the fact that the exams he sat had no firm criteria, according to his barrister Oliver Hyams. Given that, the only fair way to assess if Ahmed had reached the required standard was to compare his performance against that of the two other candidates. Mr Hyams argued that on this basis, Ahmed should have been regarded as having passed the first exam.
The judge, though,was more convinced by the testimony of Professor van Gelder, who thought that neither showed he was capable of translating mediaeval Arabic. Hyams countered that van Gelder had failed to compare Ahmed's work with that of his fellow students.
Ahmed admitted that "on a personal level, I am disappointed", as the trial was "an exhausting process for my family, my wife and my son". Despite this, Ahmed "does not think the matter will end with today's judgement, though I am respectful of the decision". Ahmed may appeal, and also is suing Dr Zimmermann for racial discrimination. Mr Hyams believed "the university would have reacted differently if complaints didn't include racism".
These further proceedings mean that the university is "unable to comment" on the case. However, a university spokesman claimed that concerning academic discipline, "problems have been rectified". He denied that the racial nature of the complaints had influenced the Senior Proctor's handling of the case, and said it was simply "unfortunate the complaint couldn't have been dealt with internally".