This guidance should be read in conjunction with the University's full Academic Misconduct Policy

 

What is Academic Misconduct?

Academic misconduct is an attempt to gain improper advantage, whether deliberately, or without intention. An allegation of academic misconduct can come as a shock so you may be feeling upset or unsure about what is going to happen next. We hope that this guidance will be a helpful overview of the process, if you would like further support please get in touch by completing our Advice Enquiry Form.

 

First offence of poor academic practice (PAP)

Where there is suspicion of poor academic practice (PAP), the marking tutor or moderator will immediately cease grading. The individual shall liaise with the first marker or moderator/double marker to determine whether the offence is PAP or not. If there is no moderator or double marker, the first marker will liaise with the Programme Leader.

Possible outcomes:

- The markers agree that there is evidence of PAP. The Student Conduct Officer shall confirm whether this is a first offence or concurrent with a first offence. The paperwork shall be sent to an Academic Conduct Officer for investigation.

- The markers cannot agree OR agree that there is evidence of a more serious form of academic misconduct. The paperwork shall be sent to an Academic Conduct Officer for investigation.

- The markers agree that there is no evidence of PAP. In this case, no further action will be taken.

 

Plagiarism, falsification of data, collusion, contract cheating or second/subsequent allegations of poor academic practice 

Where a marking tutor or moderator suspects one or more of the above forms of academic misconduct, they shall immediately cease grading. Where the marking tutor is unable to establish the source(s) from which the work has been taken, they should explain why they believe the work is not that of the student, enclosing evidence of the student’s own style from previous work.

You may be requested to attend a viva voce interview.

 

Cheating in an exam or practical assessment, or attempting to obtain unauthorised access to exam question papers, bribery attempts, unethical conduct and submission of false declarations for special consideration

The staff member/invigilator who suspects a candidate of attempting to gain improper advantage shall report the incident and provide any evidence to the Chair of the Faculty Academic Development Committee (FADC). Unauthorised materials may be confiscated or photographic evidence passed to Registry once the exam has ended. The Exams Officer shall forward a report to the Chair of FADC who shall appoint an Academic Conduct Officer to investigate.

 

Personation

If an invigilator believes that a student is being or has been impersonated, they may request to see photo identification. The invigilator(s) shall complete a report on the day of the exam to be submitted to the Exams Officer in Registry. Registry shall forward the report to the Chair of FADC who shall appoint an Academic Conduct Officer to investigate.

 

 

Informing you and reaching a conclusion

The Academic Conduct Officer allocated to the investigation will determine whether there is evidence of academic misconduct. They will review the assessment, and email you with a summary of the evidence which supports the allegation. You will be invited to provide a response within 10 working days of the date of the email.

Although Extenuating Circumstances cannot be used to deny an allegation, if serious adverse circumstances have contributed, you may request that this is taken into consideration.

If you do not respond to the email within the time frame they will presume that you do not wish to deny the allegation.

 

 

The Academic Conduct Officer shall then prepare a report taking into account all available evidence, including your response, before reaching one of the following conclusions:

a) No case to answer - all records of the allegation are destroyed

b) Poor academic practice

c) Academic misconduct

 

 

If you admit the allegation the Student Conduct Officer shall write to you confirming the penalty imposed, as recommended by the investigating officer in their report, and confirmed as appropriate by an academic conduct officer from another faculty. This will depend on the nature of the offence and on the number of previous offences.

If you deny the allegation, the Investigating Officer may conclude that there is no case to answer, or conclude that despite your denial, there is evidence for poor academic practice or academic misconduct. If the allegation is upheld, you will be invited to add to your statement and attend a Hearing. If you do not respond to the Academic Conduct Officer’s email confirming that there is an allegation of academic misconduct being investigated, they will presume that you do not wish to deny the allegation and the matter will not proceed to a Hearing.

Any denial must be accompanied by evidence as to why no offence has taken place. It is not sufficient to respond with “I didn’t do this” or “it was an accident”.

 

 

Once it has been confirmed that you are denying the allegation, the Student Conduct Officer shall proceed to convene a Panel for a hearing, held at the University. Here you will have the opportunity to present your case. This is normally held within a further 20 working days, you will receive at least 5 working days’ notice of the date, time and place of the meeting. Panel members will not normally have taught you, be closely connected to you or to your Faculty. If you do not attend the Panel will proceed to deal with the allegation in your absence provided the Chair of the Panel is satisfied that you were properly notified. All proceedings and papers associated with the Hearing shall be confidential to those who attend it.

 

 

You will be informed in writing, of the outcome of the Hearing, normally within 5 working days.

Possible outcomes:

- No case to answer (all records of the allegation are destroyed)

- Poor academic practice or academic misconduct identified (penalty determined as indicated in policy)

The decision of the Panel shall be final. You can only appeal on the grounds that correct procedure was not followed. You may submit a complaint, in accordance with the Complaints Policy. Details of this process will be given in your confirmation of outcome letter / email.

The University will then issue you with a Completion of Procedures Letter after its internal procedures have been completed. This allows you to take a complaint to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (OIA).