ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT PROCEDURE Lynn Jones Regulations, Assessment and Awards Manager.

ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT PROCEDURE

Lynn Jones

Regulations, Assessment and Awards Manager

DEFINITION

To conduct any act whereby a person may

obtain for himself/herself or for another, an unpermitted

advantage

EXAMPLES

Plagiarism Collusion Re-use of one’s own material

Contracting with a third party to write a piece of work

Fabrication of data Introduction of unauthorised material into an

exam room or associated facilities Impersonation of an examination candidate

or allowing oneself to be impersonated

DETECTION

Suspicions by markers should be reported to the Programme Leader

Allegations to be supported by documentary evidence

Turnitin is useful tool but not conclusive

To be used when there are suspicions of academic misconduct but inadequate documentary evidence

Marker and another member of academic staff within the department to interview student

Brief report to Academic Head who will decide whether or not to pursue

Academic Investigative Interview

DETERMINATION OF LEVEL OF OFFENCE

Minor Indiscretion

Minor Academic Misconduct

Major Academic Misconduct

RESPONSIBILITY FOR DETERMINATION

Academic Head and Programme Leader

If offence occurs during an examination, Superintendant of Examinations in consultation with Academic Head

MAJOR ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

Programme Leader to advise RAAU who will organise Committee of Enquiry

Case against student to be presented by the Programme Leader or nominee

Decision made by Committee on balance of probabilities

Extenuating circumstances can be considered in determination of penalty only

PENALTIES

Range of recommended penalties provided for guidance

Factors to be considered - is it a first offence, has the student tried to deliberately deceive, has the offence been committed early on in the student’s studies

Extenuating circumstances can be considered if relevant and timely documentary evidence is provided

If a student is studying on a professional programme and a minor case of Academic Misconduct is found proven, consider under Stage 1 of the procedure

If a student is studying on a professional programme and a major case of Academic Misconduct is found proven, consider under Stage 1 or 2 of the procedure

SUITABILITY FOR PRACTICE

Student can bring along someone for support but that person may not speak without Chair’s permission

If student wants to bring a person with legal qualifications or a professional body representative, University must be advised in advance

CAN STUDENT BE ACCOMPANIED AT A HEARING?

If student confirms attendance but does not attend without good reason the hearing will continue

If student requests postponement Chair can grant this on one occasion only if evidence of mitigation is provided

If student advises non attendance or does not reply to communications, hearing will continue without student

ATTENDANCE AT HEARINGS

Grounds for Appeal

Irregularity in the conduct of the hearing

Exceptional personal circumstances which were not known when the hearing was conducted

MINOR – if accepted, refer for consideration by Committee of Enquiry

MAJOR – if accepted, refer for consideration by Appeal Panel

OIA – Following completion of internal procedures, student may apply for a review

APPEALS

The procedure can be found on the X drive under

Academic Misconduct along with other useful

documents.