Academic Offences Procedures (Cheating) for 2011-2012

The University's definition of an academic offence (cheating) may be found in the Regulations relating to Academic Affairs (Regulations 6.19 and 6.20)

Academic Offences and Procedures for dealing with alleged Academic Offences

A . Academic Offences

A1.
Academic offences include:

1. plagiarism, that is, using or copying the work of others (whether written, printed or in any other form) without proper acknowledgement in any assignment, examination or other assessed work;

2. using work previously submitted for another assignment without full acknowledgement.

3. falsifying data or evidence;

4. submitting a fraudulent claim of extenuating circumstances;

5. assisting another student to commit an academic offence;

6. submitting written work produced collaboratively unless this is explicitly permitted;

7. copying the work of another candidate or otherwise communicating with another candidate in an examination;

8. introducing any written, printed or electronically stored information into an examination other than material expressly permitted in the instructions for that examination;

9. attempting to interfere with the assessment process.

This list is not exhaustive.

A2.
In submitting any piece of work (eg dissertation, thesis, essay, test or report) a student shall acknowledge any assistance received or any use of the work of others.

[top of page]

General Considerations

A3.
A student may be found guilty of an academic offence whether or not there has been any intention to deceive; that is, a judgement that negligence has occurred is sufficient to determine guilt.

A4.
Students have a duty to inform themselves of the Academic Offences Policy and Procedures and of the academic conventions used in the University for correctly citing and acknowledging the work of others, including the correct use of quotation marks, and the regulations governing examinations. Further details and advice are to be found at: www.essex.ac.uk/plagiarism/  For advice on correct referencing see also departmental handbooks and websites.

A5.
Depending on their nature and severity, alleged academic offences will be dealt with by the relevant Head of Department or Dean or by an Academic Offences Committee. Head of Department shall also be taken to include Head of School, Director of Area, Centre or Institute or a nominated academic for a partner institution.

A6.
Plagiarism or cheating in work for a Masters dissertation/project or for a research degree is considered an especially severe offence since the explicit aim is to carry out independent investigative work.

A7.
When any academic offence is alleged, a student is required either to attend any meeting arranged to discuss the alleged offence with the relevant Head of Department, Dean, or Academic Offences Committee or if he or she does not wish to attend to submit a written response by the date of the meeting. If the student attends the meeting, he or she may bring a student or other member of the University or Students' Union to help him or her in presenting his or her case. In some instances, such as allegations relating to collusion or group submissions, it may be necessary and appropriate for the relevant Head of Department, Dean or Academic Offences Committee to see more than one student at a time. Reasonable notification will be given of any such meeting, although it may sometimes be called at short notice.

A8.
If an allegation of an academic offence has been proven, the student will be invited to disclose any further cases which they wish to be taken into consideration as part of the same offence. Students are warned that all undisclosed offences which come to light will be treated as subsequent offences, potentially carrying heavier penalties.

A9.
In determining the penalty for an academic offence, any previous confirmed academic offence will be taken into account. When more than one offence is considered at the same time the offences will normally all be considered as a first offence if the student has not previously been found guilty of an academic offence. A subsequent offence may occur from the point at which a student is found guilty of a first offence.

A10.
Students are reminded that the penalties for academic offences may be very severe, especially those for any subsequent offence (ie an offence identified after any previous offence has been confirmed), including requiring a student to withdraw or determining that a degree not be awarded. Students with a proven academic offence on record may be prevented from studying abroad under the Study Abroad scheme, and where necessary, the relevant Professional Bodies will also be informed.

A11
Where a student who is in receipt of a University scholarship is found guilty of an academic offence by an Academic Offences Committee, the Chair may refer the matter to the appropriate Dean to determine whether there is good cause to terminate the scholarship.

A12.
Where a student has a penalised mark for work as a result of an academic offence the penalty will not be carried forward  if the student repeats a year. However, the record of the offence is kept on the student's record and the academic offences database and any further offences will be classified as subsequent offences. Where necessary, the relevant Professional Bodies will be informed.

A13.
All information relating to suspected academic offences and their outcomes will be recorded on the academic offences database and in the student's file.

A14.
For students subject to the Breach of Professional Conduct, Fitness to Practice  and Termination of Training Procedure, an academic offence that affects professional suitability may also be referred to other relevant University authorities to be handled in accordance with the appropriate procedures.

[top of page]

B. Alleged academic offences dealt with by Heads of Department

Alleged Offences Dealt with by Heads

B1.
Heads of Department are responsible for the initial investigation of alleged academic offences relating to coursework submitted by any student undertaking a module in his or her department, and relating to preliminary drafts of chapters or to papers for a Supervisory Board produced by a research student in his or her own department. Where a student is charged with committing an offence on a module which is not run by a Department, School or Centre, the Head responsible for the student's degree programme shall investigate the allegation.

B2.
All cases referred to a Head of Department must be investigated and dealt with on a formal basis.

B3.
Heads of Department can take decisions about all suspected academic offences relating to coursework where:

1. the offence is a first or subsequent academic offence that if confirmed will result in a penalty that it is within the Head’s powers to impose (see B8(b));

2. the student does not request referral to the Dean;

3. the alleged offence does not involve any breach of the University’s disciplinary regulations.

B4.
Where the alleged offence involves an alleged breach of the University’s disciplinary regulations, the case must first be referred to the Proctor.

B5.
All other cases, including all cases relating to formal examinations or involving research students and any allegation of an academic offence after the degree has been conferred, must be referred to the relevant Dean.

B6.
Where appropriate, a student is entitled to see a copy of paperwork relating to the alleged offence at least one day prior to the meeting with the Head of Department.

B7.
A Head of Department should not take a student's array of marks into consideration when allocating a penalty.

Heads' Powers

B8.
Heads of Department acting on behalf of Senate shall have the power, taking into account the circumstances of the case, to:

1. determine that no offence has been committed;

2. determine that an offence has been committed and issue one of the following penalties;

1. a formal written warning only;

2. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for an uncapped mark;

3. unit of assessment to be rewritten and assessed for an uncapped mark (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board);

4. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for the maximum of a capped pass mark;

5. unit of assessment rewritten and assessed for the maximum of a capped pass mark (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board;

6. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for credit purposes only with a mark of zero to be retained for all calculations, including degree classification; or

7. unit of assessment to be rewritten and assessed for credit purposes only with mark of zero retained for all calculations, including degree classification (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board).

3. refer the case to the relevant Dean for further investigation.

4. In some instances, where an academic offence has been committed in a unit of assessment which is worth a small part of the module aggregate, it may be appropriate for a Head of Department to allocate a penalty of a mark of zero for the unit of assessment with no resubmission or second attempt allowed. This penalty may only be allocated following consultation with and approval by the relevant Dean.

[top of page]

B9.
No person shall perform the functions of a Head of Department regarding academic offences unless approved by the Dean. At the Head's request, the Dean may approve the appointment of named members, normally senior, of the academic staff of the Department to perform all the functions of the Head of Department in respect of these procedures for all alleged offences in the Department.

B10.
Individual members of the academic staff are not permitted to make decisions about any case of suspected plagiarism and must refer these to the Head of Department or his/her nominee(s).

B11.
A Head should not be involved in the investigation of allegations for modules for which they are responsible or in relation to a research student where they are the student’s supervisor, or a member of the Supervisory Board. In such cases they should appoint a substitute who must be approved by the Dean.

Heads' Duties

B12.
The Head is required to:

1. inform in writing each student whose case has been referred to him or her about the nature of the alleged offence;

2. notify the relevant Dean of the alleged offence and determine whether there has been any previous confirmed academic offence;

3. inform each student in writing of his or her decisions and the student’s right to appeal against the decision;

4. inform the Dean in writing of his or her decisions in respect of any case and the grounds for the decision (a copy must be kept both in the student’s departmental file and in the central file);

5. inform the Dean annually of the number of cases dealt with by him or her.

C. Alleged Academic Offences dealt with by Deans

Alleged Offences dealt with by Deans

C1.
Deans investigate:

1. all alleged offences relating to formal examinations.

2. all alleged offences relating to coursework which the regulations indicate must be referred to them by Heads of Department.

3. all alleged offences relating to research degrees referred to them by Heads of Department.

C2.
Deans can take decisions about the following alleged offences where:

1. the student does not request that the case is referred to an Academic Offences Committee;

2. the offence is a first or subsequent academic offence that could result in a penalty that it is within the Deans’ powers to impose (see C9(b));

3. any first offence by a research student where, if confirmed, the appropriate penalty would be no more than a formal written warning.

[top of page]

C3.
Deans must refer to an Academic Offences Committee:

1. any case where the student requests that it be heard by an Academic Offences Committee;

2. any case where the penalty would be more severe than it is within the Dean’s powers to impose (see C9(b));

3. in the case of research students: any allegation where, if confirmed, the appropriate penalty could be more than a formal warning and any allegation involving a subsequent offence (see also C5).

C4.
Deans must refer to the Proctor any cases involving breaches of the University’s disciplinary regulations.

C5.
Where an offence is alleged by an Examiner during the examination process for a research degree, the examination must be suspended and the allegation referred to the Dean of the Graduate School. If plagiarism is alleged before the viva takes place, then the viva should be held over until the investigation has been completed. If plagiarism is identified during the viva, the Examiners should inform the candidate and suspend the viva. In both cases, the Examiners should prepare a written report for the Dean of the Graduate School. All allegations brought after the thesis has been submitted will be considered by an Academic Offences Committee.

C6.
Where an allegation of an academic offence arises after the degree has been conferred the Dean must consult the Vice-Chancellor who shall determine the procedures to be used in dealing with the case.

C7.
Where appropriate, a student is entitled to see a copy of paperwork relating to the alleged offence at least one day prior to the meeting with the Dean.

C8.
A Dean should not take a student's array of marks into consideration when allocating a penalty.

Deans' Powers

C9.
Deans acting on behalf of Senate shall have the power to:

1. determine that no offence has been committed;

2. determine that an offence has been committed and impose one of the following penalties:

1. a formal written warning only

2. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for an uncapped mark;

3. unit of assessment to be rewritten and  assessed for an uncapped mark (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board);

4. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for the maximum of a capped pass mark;

5. unit of assessment rewritten and assessed for the maximum of a capped pass mark (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board);

6. the student resit the examination for the maximum of a capped pass mark;

7. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for credit purposes only with a mark of zero to be retained for all calculations, including degree classification; or

8. unit of assessment to be rewritten and assessed for credit purposes only with mark of zero retained for all calculations, including degree classification (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board).

3. refer the case to an Academic Offences committee for further consideration;

C10.
For research students the Dean can issue a formal written warning only.

[top of page]

Deans' Duties

C11.
The Dean is required to:

1. inform in writing each student whose case has been referred to him or her about the nature of the alleged offence.

2. establish whether there has been a previous confirmed academic offence;

3. inform in writing each student of his or her decision and the student’s right to appeal against the decision;

4. ensure that a note is kept on the student’s central file of the decision and the reasons for it.

5. inform the Head of Department of the decision;

6. inform in writing each student whose case has been referred to an Academic Offences Committee the substance of such reference;

7. report to the School Boards annually the number of cases dealt with by Heads and the Deans.

D. Academic Offences Committees

Membership

D1.
An Academic Offences Committee is a Committee of Senate. Members of an Academic Offences Committee must be drawn from the Panel of potential Academic Offences Committee members. In the case of a research student, the Panel comprises all departmental Directors of Research Students.

D2.
An Academic Offences Committee shall consist of a Dean in the chair, and two members of staff from outside the student’s department who have no connection with the case in question. The Committee shall be serviced by an Secretary.

D3.
If a Dean has previously made a judgement relating to the allegation in question, then another Dean must chair the Academic Offences Committee.

Heads of Department

D4.
The Head of the Department in which the alleged offence has occurred will attend the Committee to set out the evidence relating to the alleged offence (ie to act as prosecutor). The Head should not present any mitigating circumstances of which he/she is aware unless they relate to the Department’s procedures or teaching. Neither should the Head propose or comment on any penalty that might be imposed.

[top of page]

D5.
The Head is not a member of the Committee and can only attend when the student is present (not before or after). The Head is not permitted to ask questions of the student during the meeting except through the Chair.

D6.
Heads may, if they wish, delegate their duties in relation to Academic Offences Committees to an appropriate member of the academic staff in their department.

The Secretary of the Committee

D7.
The Secretary of the Committee will notify the student in writing of the time and place in which the case will be heard.

D8.
The Secretary of the Committee will take notes of the meeting, taking particular care to record the reasons for the decision and the deliberation concerning the imposition of any penalty and the alternatives from the set of possible penalties that were considered.

Student Attendance and Representation

D9.
If the student admits to the charge by informing the Dean in writing within five working days of notification of the charge, he or she need not attend the Committee and the Committee shall be free to proceed in his or her absence. In such a case a student may submit a statement in mitigation.

D10.
The student charged will be invited to be present at the committee whenever oral evidence is being heard by the Committee. He or she may bring a student or other member of the University or Students’ Union to help him or her in presenting his or her case to the Committee.

D11.
The Committee may proceed in the absence of the student or the student’s representative provided that the Chair is satisfied that due notice has been given to the student.

D12.
Where appropriate, a student is entitled to see a copy of paperwork relating to the alleged offence at least one day prior to the Academic Offences Committee.

Order of Proceedings

D13.
The Chair of the Committee shall have the authority to determine the order of proceedings and exclude any material which appears irrelevant to the case.

[top of page]

D14.
The usual pattern of proceedings is:

1. The members of the Committee have a preliminary discussion without the student, the student’s representative or the Head being present.

2. The student, the student’s representative and the Head enter the room and the Chair introduces all those present.

3. The Chair checks that the student has received details of the alleged offence and any supporting documentation.

4. The Chair explains the order of proceedings to the student.

5. The evidence relating to the alleged offence is then presented by the relevant Head, and members of the Committee, the student and the student’s representative are invited to put questions to the Head.

6. The Chair then invites the student to put forward a case orally if he or she wishes to do so including any mitigation, and members of the committee (but not the Head) are invited to put questions to the student.

7. The Chair invites the student’s representative to put forward any additional statement.

8. The Chair invites the student to make any final response.

9. The student, the student’s representative and the Head are then asked to leave the room.

10. The Committee then deliberates and comes to a decision as to whether an offence has been committed.

11. The Committee then determines the appropriate penalty from the set of penalties available to it, clarifying the reasons for the choice of penalty.

12. The student is then recalled to the room to be told the decision as to whether the alleged offence is confirmed and, if so, the penalty and the reasons why this is the appropriate penalty. The Head of Department may be present during this final stage.

D15.
Where the student’s case is being heard by an Academic Offences Committee because it is a subsequent offence this information will be included in the papers given to the Committee in advance of the meeting.

D16.
An Academic Offences Committee should not take a student's array of marks into consideration when allocating a penalty.

D17.
Only members of the Committee and the Secretary shall be present while a committee is reaching a decision of innocence or guilt, or on any penalty or other action.

Adjournment

D18.
The Committee may adjourn:

1. in order to enable the student or the student’s representative to be present;

2. where this is necessary to obtain further information.

D19.
The Committee shall meet to consider an adjourned case as soon as it is feasible and not later than three months after the adjournment, although the case need not be determined at the resumed meeting. If necessary, the Dean may co-opt additional members to replace any member not able to attend the reconvened meeting, including a new chair. If there are two new members the reconvened meeting shall proceed as a new hearing. If there is one new member the student may request that the meeting proceed as a new hearing.

[top of page]

Powers of the Committee

D20.
An Academic Offences Committee shall have the power to:

1. determine that an offence has not been committed.

2. determine that an offence has been committed and impose one of the following penalties:

1. a formal written warning only;

2. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for an uncapped mark;

3. unit of assessment to be rewritten and assessed for an uncapped mark (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board);

4. unit of assessment be referenced correctly and assessed for the maximum of a capped pass mark;

5. unit of assessment rewritten and assessed for the maximum of a capped pass mark (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam Board);

6. the student resit the examination for the maximum of a capped pass mark;

7. unit of assessment to be referenced correctly and assessed for credit purposes only, with a mark of zero to be retained for all calculations, including degree classification;

8. unit of assessment to be rewritten and assessed for credit purposes only with mark of zero retained for all calculations, including degree classification  (this penalty should only be applied where the offence does not simply involve referencing, and for those courses where the Rules of Assessment permit resubmission of failed work prior to the Exam  Board);

9. a mark of zero be awarded for the unit of assessment with no resubmission or second attempt permitted;

10. a mark of zero be awarded for the entire module with no resubmission or second attempt permitted;

11. a mark of zero be awarded for the module and the student be permitted to complete credits for an exit award only;

12. a mark of zero be awarded for the module  and the Examination Board be instructed to consider the student only for an exit award on the basis of credits already achieved; or

13. the student be required to withdraw without being awarded a degree or exit award (earned credits, that is credits which have already been ratified by a Board of Examiners can be recorded).

3. In the case of a research student where the alleged offence occurs prior to submission an Academic Offences Committee shall have the power to:

1. determine that an offence has not been committed;

2. determine that an offence has been committed and impose one of the following penalties:

1. a formal written warning only;

2. the student’s registration be downgraded and he or she can only be considered for a lower award; or

3. the student be required to withdraw.

4. In the case of a research student where the alleged offence occurs after submission an Academic Offences Committee shall have the power to:

1. determine that an offence has not been committed;

2. determine that an offence has been committed and impose one of the following penalties;

1. the Examiners be instructed to consider the thesis, based on the unplagiarised sections, for a lower award with the outcomes limited to those available for a referred thesis; or

2. the student be required to withdraw (any earned credits can be recorded).

Record

D21.
A note of the committee’s meeting, including the decision and the grounds for it, will be taken by the Secretary.

[top of page]

Chair's Duties

D22.
The Chair shall ensure that:

1. each student is informed in writing of the Committee’s decision and of the student’s right to appeal against the decision;

2. a note is kept on the student’s central file of the decision and the reasons for it;

3. the Head of Department is informed of the decision.

E. Appeals against decisions by Heads, Deans or Academic Offences Committees

Right of Appeal

E1.
A student shall have the right of appeal to an Academic Offences Appeal Committee against any decision of a Head of Department, Dean or Academic Offences Committee (hereafter ‘the Initial Adjudicator’) on the following grounds:

1. that there is material evidence now available which was not previously available to the Initial Adjudicator and of such a nature as to cause reasonable doubt as to whether the result might have been different had the material been available;

2. that the Initial Adjudicator departed from the provisions of sections B, C or D in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the student and causing reasonable doubt as to whether the result might have been different had this not occurred;

3. that the facts set out in the findings of the Initial Adjudicator do not warrant the resolution that there was an academic offence as charged;

4. that the penalty imposed by the Initial Adjudicator was unreasonable having regard to all the circumstances of the case.

Lodging an Appeal

E2.
A student who wishes to appeal against the outcome of these procedures should write to the Academic Registrar within five working days of the date on which notification of the decision was sent to the student concerned by the Initial Adjudicator. If the student can show to the satisfaction of the PVC (Academic Standards) that circumstances beyond his or her control prevented this time limit being adhered to and that injustice would result from adhering to it, the Academic Registrar may extend the time limit in which an appeal may be lodged up to the period of thirty days from the date on which the notification of the decision was sent.

E3.
The written appeal shall set out in detail the grounds of the appeal.

E4.
The student may withdraw an appeal as of right at any time before the meeting of the Committee.

[top of page]

Duties of the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching)

E5.
On receipt of an Appeal the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching) shall nominate a Dean who has no previous involvement with the case (hereafter the Appointed Dean) to deal with the appeal.

Duties of the Appointed Dean

E6.
The Appointed Dean shall inform in writing each student who lodges a request for an appeal, normally within ten days of the receipt by him or her of that request, whether or not in his or her judgement the request discloses a proper ground for an appeal.

E7.
If there are proper grounds for an appeal the Appointed Dean shall request that the Initial Adjudicator against whose decision the appeal is made, write a Statement of the Case, which shall include:

1. details of the charge or charges in respect of which the decision was made;

2. a brief summary of the evidence and of the relevant findings;

3. the decision;

4. details of any penalty imposed;

5. a brief comment as to the reason for such findings, decision and penalty; and

6. any further information which the person or body concerned considers to be relevant.

E8.
The Appointed Dean must notify the student and the Initial Adjudicator of the time and place at which the appeal will be heard.

E9.
The Appointed Dean must inform the student of his or her right to bring a student or other member of the University or Students’ Union to help in presenting the appeal to the Committee.

E10.
The Appointed Dean will provide the student and the Initial Adjudicator with a copy of the statement of the case in advance of the meeting of the Academic Offences Appeal Committee.

Membership of an Academic Offences Appeal Committee

E11.
An Academic Offences Appeal Committee is a committee of Senate. Members of the Committee must be drawn from the University Academic Offences Panel.

E12.
An Academic Offences Appeal Committee consists of the Appointed Dean in the chair, and two members of staff from outside the student’s Department who have had no connection with the case.

E13.
The Appeal Committee will be serviced by a Secretary.

[top of page]

Order of Proceedings

E14.
The Chair of the Committee shall have the authority to determine the order of proceedings and exclude any material which appears irrelevant to the case.

E15.
The usual pattern of proceedings is:

1. The members of the Committee have a preliminary discussion without the student, the student’s representative or the Initial Adjudicator being present.

2. The student, the student’s representative and the Initial Adjudicator enter the room and the Chair introduces all those present.

3. The Chair checks that the student has received details of the case and any supporting documentation.

4. The Chair explains the order of proceedings to the student.

5. The evidence relating to the alleged offence is then presented by the Initial Adjudicator and members of the Committee are invited to put questions to the Initial Adjudicator.

6. The Chair then invites the student to put forward a case orally if he or she wishes to do so including any mitigation, and members of the committee (but not the Initial Adjudicator) are invited to put questions to the student.

7. The Chair invites the student’s representative to put forward any additional statement.

8. The Chair invites the student to make any final response.

9. The student, the student’s representative and the Initial Adjudicator are then asked to leave the room.

10. The Committee then deliberates and comes to a decision as to whether an offence has been committed.

11. The Committee then determines the appropriate penalty from the set of penalties available to it, clarifying the reasons for the choice of penalty.

12. The student is then recalled to the room to be told the decision as to whether the alleged offence is confirmed and, if so, the penalty and the reasons why this is the appropriate penalty. The Initial Adjudicator may be present during this final stage.

E16.
The Committee may proceed in the absence of the student or the student’s representative provided that the Chair is satisfied that due notice has been given to the student.

E17.
Only members of the Committee and the Secretary shall be present while a committee is reaching a decision of innocence or guilt, or on any penalty or other action.

Adjournment

E18.
The Committee may adjourn:

1. in order to enable the student or the student’s representative to be present;

2. where this is necessary to obtain further information.

[top of page]

E19.
The Committee shall meet to consider an adjourned case as soon as it is feasible and not later than three months after the adjournment, although the case need not be determined at the resumed meeting. If necessary, the Appointed Dean may co-opt additional members to replace any member not able to attend the reconvened meeting, including a new chair. If there are two new members the reconvened meeting shall proceed as a new hearing. If there is one new member the student may request that the meeting proceed as a new hearing.

Powers of an Academic Offences Appeal Committee

E20.
An Academic Offences Appeal Committee shall have the power to:

1. a. rescind a resolution of a Head, Dean or Academic Offences Committee that the student has committed an offence and rescind all consequential penalties;

2. confirm a resolution of a Head, Dean or Academic Offences Committee that the student has committed an academic offence;

3. confirm or amend (increasing or decreasing) the penalty allocated by a Head, Dean or Academic Offences Committee, provided that any amendment is consistent with the powers of the original authority.

E21.
A note of the committee’s meeting, including the decision and the grounds for it, will be taken by the Secretary.

E22.
The number of cases dealt with by an Academic Offences Appeals Committee under these procedures shall be reported by the Academic Registrar to Senate on an annual basis.

Further Appeals

E23.
Any appeal following the formal conclusion of the appeals procedures set out above may be made on the grounds of procedural irregularities in the appeals process only. A student who wishes to appeal against the outcome of these procedures should write to the Academic Registrar within four weeks of the Appeal hearing setting out in detail the nature of the evidence to support the claim that there were procedural irregularities in the appeals process. If prima facie there is evidence to support the claim then the case will be reviewed by a Pro-Vice-Chancellor. If the Pro-Vice-Chancellor determines that there were procedural irregularities in the appeals process then the case will be referred to an Appeals Committee for consideration.

E24.
The Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) provides an independent scheme for the review of student complaints or appeals. When the University’s internal procedures for dealing with complaints and appeals have been exhausted, the University will issue a Completion of Procedures letter. Students wishing to avail themselves of the opportunity of an independent review by the OIA must submit their application to the OIA within three months of the issue of the Completion of Procedures letter. Full details of the scheme are available on request and will be enclosed with the Completion of Procedures letter.

[top of page]

Academic Offences Penalty Guidelines for Heads, Deans and Academic Offences Committees

Principles

F1.
In determining penalties Heads, Deans and Academic Offences Committees will take the following into account:

1. the degree of severity of the offence

2. whether it is a first or subsequent offence

3. the academic stage the student has reached (first year u/g, Masters, etc)

4. any mitigating circumstances (see the 'Guidelines for Penalties' tables for further guidance.

Application

F2.
Any penalty allocated by a Head of Department, a Dean or an Academic Offences Committee will also apply to any reassessment of the unit of assessment in question allowed by subsequent Exam Boards.

F3.
If a student does not take the opportunity to submit a correctly referenced or rewritten unit of assessment, or resit the examination, then a mark of zero will be allocated  and no further submission for credit or otherwise will be allowed.

F4.
If reassessment for the module is not on a like-for-like basis then the allocated penalty will be applied to the overall module mark in proportion to the weighting of the penalised unit of assessment.

F5.
In cases where the module mark is determined by either the aggregate of coursework and examination or examination only, whichever is the higher, then any penalty applied to an element of the coursework component will result in the student's final module mark being determined by the aggregate of coursework and examination: the student will not be entitled to have their module mark determined by examination only.

F6.
In cases where a module mark is determined by the best grades of a student's work (for example, the best three out of four units of assessments) the unit(s) of assessment to which a penalty has been applied must be included in the final aggregate. The student will not be entitled to have the module mark determined by discounting any such penalties.

Definition of Terminology

F7.
An examination is to be defined as any assessment under controlled conditions, including an in-class test.

F8.
A unit of assessment is to be defined as any element of a module which contributes to a final module mark.

The guidelines presented below are guidelines only and it is very important that those making decisions about penalties take the evidence with which they have been provided and any mitigating circumstances into account.

Table 1: Guidelines for penalties for first offences in taught courses