Responsible officer: Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Designated officer:
Approving authority: Academic Board
Approval: 6 October 2009
Last amended: 6 October 2009
Effective starting date: 18 January 2010
Any policies replaced by this policy: Student Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Policy
Policy number: AB15
Related policies:
- Student Academic Integrity – Governing Policy
- Assessment: Courses and Coursework Programs – Governing Policy
- Student Grievances and Appeals – Governing Policy
- Student Conduct and Discipline – Governing Policy
Due date for next review: 6 October 2014
Part A: Preliminary
1. Purpose of policy
This policy is intended to promote an understanding of student academic misconduct and provide a framework for identifying and addressing such misconduct in relation to learning and assessment.
2. Application of policy
2.1 This policy applies to:
(a) all students enrolled at the University of the Sunshine Coast and in institutions with which the University has a partnership agreement involving the teaching of this University’s programs and courses and where this University is responsible for assessment of students covered by the agreement; and
(b) all staff, decision-making bodies, and partners of the University of the Sunshine Coast.
2.2 This policy does not apply to:
(a) research at the University of the Sunshine Coast, refer to the Code of Conduct for Research and Research Misconduct Statement; and
(b) behavioural misconduct as defined in the Student Conduct and Discipline Policy.
3. Definitions
In this policy the following definitions apply:
“Academic fraud” means deceit or trickery by which a student seeks to gain an unfair or dishonest advantage in relation to a student’s learning and assessment activities, for example by cheating.
“Balance of probability” means a standard of proof established by a predominance of evidence that suggests that something was more likely to have occurred than not occurred.
“Course” means a specific subject that is studied as a component of an award program.
“Coursework” means study that involves undertaking courses other than research components in higher degrees by research.
“Course Coordinator” means the staff member with responsibility for the teaching of a course in which student academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred.
“Dean” means the Dean of the Faculty responsible for a course in which student academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred; or the Director of Studies, USC International in the case of alleged student academic misconduct in English language studies undertaken with USC International.
“Exclusion” means exclusion from the University for a minimum period of one year, after which period the student must reapply for admission if they are seeking re-enrolment.
“Expulsion” means permanent exclusion from the University.
“Head of School” means the Head of School or an equivalent position within a faculty responsible for the supervision of the Course Coordinator in whose course student academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred.
“Student” means a person who, at the time that the alleged academic misconduct occurred, was enrolled in a program, Direct Entry English Pathway or a course offered by the University.
“University” means the University of the Sunshine Coast.
Part B: Policy
4. What is Student Academic Misconduct?
4.1 Student Academic Misconduct is any departure from student academic integrity as described in the Student Academic Integrity – Governing Policy. It may involve, for example, actions such as the following:
4.1.1 Academic fraud, characterised by such actions or attempted actions as –
(a) plagiarising – presenting the thoughts, words, phrases or works of another as one's own, by:
(i) copying or paraphrasing material from any source without due acknowledgment;
(ii) using another's expression or ideas without appropriate recognition or due acknowledgement (e.g. by failure to use an academic referencing system);
(b) falsifying or fabricating data obtained from experiments, interviews, surveys, or similar activities;
(c) making changes to work submitted for assessment after that work has been assessed and then lodging a grievance or appeal with a claim that the work has been incorrectly assessed;
(d) in group work that is presented for assessment, falsely representing the contribution made by an individual student to the work of the group;
(e) acquiring, attempting to acquire, possessing, or distributing (either physically, electronically or orally) restricted assessment-related material or information, such as examination questions or an examination question paper, without the prior authorisation of the relevant Course Coordinator;
(f) submitting, for the purposes of meeting the assessment requirements for a course that a student is currently undertaking, work that has been assessed previously and counted towards completion of another course;
(g) taking unauthorised materials into an examination;
(h) during an examination:
(i) communicating with other students undertaking the examination;
(ii) reading or copying the answers of another student undertaking the same examination;
(i) impersonating another student in an examination or other assessment activity (e.g. undertaking an examination or a work placement for another student);
(j) a student making arrangements for another person to falsely represent himself or herself as that particular student for the purpose of undertaking an assessment activity or producing work to be submitted for assessment;
(k) making arrangements with another person to be party to an act of academic fraud;
(l) participating in any other actions that are intended to give a student an unfair or dishonest advantage in learning activities and assessment.
4.1.2 Collusion in academic fraud – encouraging and assisting a student in committing, or in attempting to commit, academic fraud, for example in any of the ways described in 4.1.1. above, and additionally by such actions as –
(a) students jointly undertaking the whole or part of work that is to be presented for assessment in the knowledge that each student will claim that the work is wholly that student’s own work;
(b) providing a student with the opportunity to copy or plagiarise work completed by another person in order that the student can include that work in material to be submitted for assessment:
(i) by enabling the student to copy answers produced during an examination;
(ii) providing the student with a copy of work which has been completed by another student on the same or a similar assessment task and is to be submitted for assessment or had been assessed previously.
5. Prevention of Student Academic Misconduct
5.1 Staff who interact with students are expected to contribute to the prevention of student academic misconduct, for example by:
(a) conveying to students and staff the importance and implications of this policy, its parent policy and the associated procedures;
(b) providing students with clear information to avoid academic fraud in advance of students commencing assessment tasks;
(c) developing and providing students and staff with written guides on the use of standard academic referencing and methods for avoiding or detecting plagiarism;
(d) using electronic submission of assignments in association with electronic text matching detection systems;
(e) avoiding repeated use of the same assessment tasks or examination questions over time;
(f) requiring students to sign statements that their assignment task is their own when lodging any work submitted for assessment.
6. Detection of apparent cases of academic fraud and collusion
6.1 Teaching and support staff, are:
(a) expected to develop and adopt strategies to aid in the detection of apparent instances of student academic misconduct, including for matters such as:
- plagiarism;
- forged or falsified data, findings or work;
- false representation of student identity;
- false representations concerning individual contributions made to group work;
- unauthorised access to restricted assessment-related materials;
- non-compliance with examination instructions;
- collusion in academic fraud; and
(b) encouraged to make use of electronic text matching services that aid in prevention and detection of plagiarism in work electronically submitted by students, and to adopt other detection strategies that enable judgements to be made about the authenticity of a student’s work.
6.2 When academic fraud or collusion is suspected, the person must immediately report the instance to the relevant Course Coordinator in accordance with the procedures associated with this policy.
6.3 The report must be accompanied by relevant evidence, e.g. direct or documentary evidence such as student work, text matching reports, or witness statements.
6.4 In the case that the relevant Course Coordinator is unavailable the instance is reported to the relevant Head of School or equivalent.
7. Categorisation of misconduct
7.1 Reported instances of student academic misconduct are classified by the degree of seriousness of the misconduct: Category 1 and Category 2.
7.2 Category 1 instances are confined to:
(a) instances of plagiarism that appear to be a consequence of a student’s lack of knowledge of, or skill in, the conventions of academic writing or arising from carelessness rather than a deliberate act of deception;
(b) instances of collusion, or attempted collusion that appears to be other than a deliberate act of deception.
7.3 All other instances of student academic misconduct are regarded as Category 2 instances.
8. Preliminary assessment of alleged misconduct
8.1 A Course Coordinator who receives a report or identifies alleged student academic misconduct, is required to make a preliminary assessment. Based on the information and evidence provided with the report, the Course Coordinator determines whether:
(a) there is sufficient evidence that the matter should be investigated as a Category 1 or 2 case, or
(b) there is no case and the matter should proceed no further.
8.2 In undertaking the preliminary assessment the Course Coordinator will act in accordance with the procedures associated with this policy.
9. Investigation of alleged misconduct
9.1 For instances of alleged misconduct assessed as Category 1, the Course Coordinator commences an investigation; for alleged misconduct assessed as Category 2, the Course Coordinator refers the report to the Dean of the Faculty for investigation.
9.2 The purpose of the investigation in both cases is to make an independent evidence-based determination of whether:
(a) it has been established beyond reasonable doubt that the misconduct did occur; and
(b) there were any associated extenuating circumstances.
9.3 The investigator must:
(a) act fairly without bias, and without preconceived notions of culpability;
(b) make inquiries and take actions to determine the facts of the matter based on sound reasoning and relevant evidence;
(c) commence and complete the investigation without undue delay;
(d) inform the student/s concerned of the general substance of the allegation and the range of possible consequences if the investigation results in the allegation being substantiated;
(e) provide the student/s concerned with the opportunity to respond to and put forward evidence or arguments in their favour; and
(f) provide opportunity for the student/s concerned to make a case concerning why a particular consequence should not follow in the event that the allegation is substantiated.
9.4 On completion of the investigation, the investigator prepares a report, and undertakes post-investigation actions in accordance with the procedures associated with this policy.
10. Basis for determining educational/remedial actions or penalties for substantiated cases of student academic misconduct
10.1 Actions that are required to be taken by a student must be educational in intent and be designed for the purpose of preventing further student academic misconduct by the particular student.
10.2 The investigator determines a penalty to be applied to a particular student or an educational/remedial action to be taken by a student on the basis of the evidence, any extenuating circumstances and any record of past misconduct in the context of the following:
(a) whether the student is a relatively new and inexperienced higher education student;
(b) whether the student has a history of academic misconduct;
(c) the extent to which processes relating to education on student academic integrity (see Student Academic Integrity – Governing Policy) had been implemented with respect to the student;
(d) any admissions by the particular student in relation to the misconduct;
(e) the nature and extent of the misconduct;
(f) where applicable, the nature and extent of the misconduct relative to the nature of the course concerned and its assessment requirements;
(g) the extent to which the misconduct, if undetected, would have resulted in an unfair advantage for that particular student;
(h) the extent to which the misconduct, if undetected, would have had potential to inflate another student’s assessment grade or otherwise result in another student gaining an unfair advantage;
(i) the extent to which the misconduct, if undetected, would have had potential to compromise the integrity of University’s assessment processes;
(j) whether the misconduct was a deliberate act of deception or cheating; and
(k) the extent to which the misconduct approximates an offence in the wider community that under law might lead to legal proceedings, e.g. theft, fraud, false representation.
10.3 Any educational/remedial activities and penalties applied by the investigator must be consistent with the following:
| Category of Student Academic Misconduct | Penalty and Educational/Remedial activities |
| Category 1 | Educational/Remedial activities and one or more of the following penalties will be applied:(a) the student is given a formal written warning or reprimand including advice of the possible consequences of any further student academic misconduct(b) the student is required to undertake and submit work in place of any work that was associated with the misconduct and is advised that where the work is an assessment item, any mark or rating awarded for the work may not exceed a score of 50% of the worth of the assessment item |
| Category 2 | |
| First instance of misconduct | Educational/Remedial activities and one or more of the following penalties will be applied: (a) the student is given a formal written warning or reprimand, including advice of the possible consequences of any further student academic misconduct. (b) the student is required to undertake and submit work in place of any work that was associated with the misconduct and is advised that where the work is an assessment item, any mark or rating awarded for the work may not exceed a score of 50% of the worth of the assessment item. (c) the student is advised in writing that specified work associated with the misconduct will not be counted towards meeting the assessment requirements for completion of a specified course. |
| Repeat Offence(s) | One or more of the following penalties will be applied: (a) the student is advised in writing that specified work associated with the misconduct will not be counted towards meeting the assessment requirements for completion of a specified course. (b) the student is awarded the grade of Withdrawn by the University (WX) (withdrawal from the course, deeming the student to have failed) for a specified course associated with the misconduct in which the student is/was enrolled. (c) the student is immediately excluded from enrolment at the University for one calendar year(d) a recommendation would be made immediately to Council recommending expulsion of the student from the University. |
11. Penalties
11.1 Exclusion
11.1.1 If the penalty of exclusion from the University is imposed the following conditions apply:
(a) the student's enrolment will be terminated;
(b) the student will be recorded as excluded from the University for the specified period of exclusion;
(c) the student will not be entitled to any benefits, advantages or privileges of the University for the specified period of exclusion;
(d) the student will not be permitted to enrol in any courses at the University whether for award or otherwise during the period of exclusion;
(e) the student may re-apply for readmission to the program at the University at the end of the period of exclusion. Readmission is not automatic and conditions may be applied relating to the student's future conduct at the University.
11.2 Expulsion
11.2.1 If the penalty of expulsion from the University is imposed the following conditions apply:
(a) the student's enrolment will be terminated;
(b) the student will be recorded as excluded from the University;
(c) the student will not be entitled to any benefits, advantages or privileges of the University;
(d) the student will not be permitted to enrol in any program or course whether for award or otherwise at the University;
(e) any further applications from the student for admission to any program at the University will only be considered with the approval of Council.
12. Grievance with decision
12.1 Where a student is aggrieved by a decision reached in relation to student academic misconduct, the student may lodge a complaint or appeal consistent with the Student Grievances and Appeals – Governing Policy and the Student Grievances and Appeals – Guidelines and Procedures.
12.2 The processes for addressing the grievance will be as provided in the Student Grievances and Appeals – Guidelines and Procedures.
13. Student Academic Misconduct Register
13.1 Through the creation of a Student Academic Misconduct Register (SAMR), the University will maintain summary records of each substantiated instance of student academic misconduct and the associated educational/remedial actions and penalties applied.
13.2 Information relating to student plagiarism cases contained in existing databases will be transferred to SAMR.
13.3 Access to the Register will be determined by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor.
13.4 A Course Coordinator can request of the Dean or delegate a search of the Register to determine if a student under investigation for a suspected case of academic misconduct has a previous record.
14. Confidentiality
14.1 All information associated with reports, investigations and outcomes associated with individual instances of student academic misconduct must be treated as confidential and not released to any third party or external agency unless required by law or the student has expressly consented to its release in writing.
15. Responsibilities
15.1 The Academic Board is responsible for:
(a) ensuring the development of procedures, guidelines and information for implementation of this policy;
(b) evaluating the effectiveness of this policy.
15.2 The Learning and Teaching Management Committee is responsible for providing advice to the Academic Board on matters relating to student academic misconduct.
15.3 Council is responsible for making a determination on alleged Category 2 repeat offences, penalty (d).
15.4 The Deputy Vice-Chancellor is responsible for:
(a) establishing and maintaining the Student Academic Misconduct Register;
(b) making a determination on alleged Category 2 repeat offences, penalty (c).
15.5 The Dean of each Faculty is responsible for:
(a) ensuring implementation of this policy and its associated procedures and guidelines within the relevant faculty;
(b) making a determination on alleged Category 2 first instance cases;
(c) making a determination on alleged Category 2 repeat offences, penalties (a) and (b);
(d) recording cases of substantiated student academic misconduct in the Student Academic Misconduct Register.
15.6 Each Course Coordinator is responsible for:
(a) establishing appropriate mechanisms to prevent and detect student academic misconduct;
(b) investigating all alleged cases of student academic misconduct that occur in the course that they are responsible for coordinating;
(c) making a determination on the level of seriousness of the alleged case of student academic misconduct case;
(d) making a determination on alleged Category 1 cases of student academic misconduct that occur in the course that they are responsible for teaching.
END