Academic Integrity Cases
What is Academic Integrity?
Any student studying or registered at the University shall be subject to disciplinary measures if they are found to be guilty of misconduct as defined in the Student Academic Integrity Policy. Some examples of behaviour that could potentially be deemed worthy for an Academic Integrity Case are;
The practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
Reusing work from a previous submission, violating the requirement for original work.
Collusion is where students work together to complete an assessment that should be taken independently. Talking to friends and peers about a topic is a valuable way to improve your understanding and support your learning. But, there is a line between working collaboratively, or in cooperation, and collusion.
Fabrication or falsification involves unauthorized creation, alteration or reporting of information in an academic activity. Examples of fabrication or falsification include the following: Artificially creating data when it should be collected from an actual experiment.
- Possession of unauthorised materials during an examination
- Commissioning/Contract Cheating
Useful Documents:
Student Academic Integrity Policy
The Students’ Union Advice Co-Ordinator can provide representation at the Academic Integrity hearing at the request of the student. The Co-Ordinator can support the student up until the hearing, with support on the paperwork, the policy and procedure. The role of the supporter is to provide moral support, act as an observer and/or notetaker and assist the student in making their case with the permission of the chair.
What to do if you are not happy with the decision after the hearing?
Students have the right to appeal against finding of guilt, penalties or the decision of the disciplinary panel. The student must submit this appeal to the University Secretary and Registrar (or nominee) within 28 days of the procedure being concluded. Possible grounds for appeal:
- Availability of new evidence which could not reasonably have been revealed during Summary Action or to the Academic Integrity Panel
- Procedural error in the previous process
- That the penalty imposed was not appropriate or proportionate to the offence