Appendix 8 – Procedures Relating to Academic Malpractice: 2017-18

From:Academic Registry
Part of: Academic Regulations > Academic Regulations 2017-18 > Appendices 2017-18

Detail

The University regards any form of unfair means in an attempt to enhance performance as a serious academic offence that may constitute grounds for exclusion, this includes but is not limited to plagiarism, collusion, falsifying data and impersonation – Appendix 8 sets out the University’s procedures for the management of such academic malpractice.

Surprising Terms

  • It is the responsibility of the student to take reasonable precautions to guard against unauthorised access by others to his/her work, both before and after assessment.
  • The University does not distinguish between intentional and unintentional plagiarism, i.e. between deliberate copying and those who simply do not understand the referencing and bibliographic systems that students are required to follow.
  • ‘Plagiarism’ includes submitting the same piece of work twice for more than one coursework assessment unless authorised by the module leader. Such activity will be regarded as an offence of ‘self-plagiarism’.
  • The definition of collusion includes knowingly permitting another student to copy all or part of his/her own work and to submit it as that student’s own unaided work.
  • Other forms of dishonest practice may also amount to academic malpractice for example;
    • attempting to obtain special consideration by offering or receiving inducements or favours
    • providing false information when submitting an Exceptional Mitigating Circumstances claim, Repeat Year application, Academic Appeal or any similar application for dispensation
    • Ensuring the non-availability of books or journal articles in the University Library by removing the relevant article or chapter from the material, or by deliberately misshelving them so that other students cannot find them.
  • Where evidence of alleged malpractice becomes available subsequent to a decision of an Assessment/Award Board, the Board has the authority to reconsider its original decision.
  • Where Malpractice procedures are invoked, the process set out in this Appendix will be followed until the case is concluded irrespective of any concurrent activity such as the student’s voluntary withdrawal.
  • Penalties applicable under the academic malpractice regulations include; Recommendation to Fail and Withdraw the candidate from the programme/module, recommendation to Fail and Withdraw the candidate from the programme/module and deem a student to have failed all assessments taken in all modules during the assessment period in which malpractice has occurred or revocation of an award.
  • Where a student is registered for a programme of study leading to professional registration/qualification and/or providing a licence to practice it is possible that a single proven instance of academic malpractice will prevent the student from obtaining the relevant named award.
  • Where the decision of a malpractice investigation is for the student to resubmit assignments and student refuses or fails to resubmit the element(s) of work as requested, a mark of zero will be awarded for the whole module.
  • In cases where the outcome of an investigation is a withdrawal from the programme due to malpractice, this information will be recorded on the final transcript.
  • Students have the right to submit an academic appeal against the outcome of a Malpractice Panel of Inquiry however disagreement with a decision made by a Panel of Inquiry shall not, of itself, form grounds for an appeal.
Posted on Last updated on Was this page helpful? Yes NoThanks for your feedback!Please tell us more:
Share