REGULATIONS RELATING TO
ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT (TAUGHT COMPONENTS AND
PROGRAMMES)
(Established by Academic Board on 18 February 2009. Minor Amendments approved by Academic
Quality and Standards Policy Committee on 22 September 2011, by Academic Board on 11 July 2012
and Quality and Standards Policy Committee on 20 September 2012)
Academic misconduct is unacceptable conduct for any member of the University community.
These Regulations only apply to students studying on taught programmes, including taught
doctorate programmes. Staff suspected of academic misconduct will be dealt with via the
Staff Disciplinary Procedure. Students studying on postgraduate research programmes will
be dealt with via the Regulations on Cheating and Plagiarism in Research Degrees.
These regulations will be supported by an appropriate set of standardised documentation.
These regulations are definitive and Schools/collaborative partners are not at liberty to alter
or modify these regulations.
The Chair of Academic Board may establish amended appendices as recommended by the
relevant Committee of the Academic Board; such amended appendices will be reported to
the following meeting of the Academic Board.
Academic misconduct is an overarching term used in these regulations to cover a range of
offences included within the following specified types; academic negligence, academic
malpractice and academic cheating (see Appendix 2).
The term ‘staff’ used in these regulations covers both staff employed by Teesside University
and staff employed by any of its collaborative partners.
These regulations are intended to allow the University to determine whether or not academic
misconduct has taken place within summative assessments. It is expected that academic
misconduct suspected in formative work will be drawn to the student’s attention by staff.
Allegations of academic misconduct within summative assessments will be considered via
the following staged procedures.




Informal Stage
School Academic Misconduct Stage 1 (hereafter referred to as Stage 1)
School Academic Misconduct Stage 2 (hereafter referred to as Stage 2)
University Academic Misconduct Review Stage (hereafter referred to as Review Stage)
The School hosting the module in which the student is suspected of academic misconduct
will be responsible for arranging and administering the Informal Stage Meeting and Stage 1
Meeting. However, due to the increased range of possible penalties and associated
progression issues, the Stage 2 Hearing will be arranged and administered by the School in
which the student is enrolled, i.e. their ‘home’ school.
The University may revoke an award, and all rights associated with an award, where it is
established that a person has obtained the award by committing academic misconduct. In
1 of 52
such cases of alleged academic misconduct, the Stage 2 procedure will be followed. If the
Stage 2 Hearing concludes that the allegation is proven, then it will recommend to the
relevant Award Board that the award be revoked. If the Award Board accepts such a
recommendation, then it will report its decision to the University’s Academic Board for
information.
The authority of the school academic misconduct proceedings is established through a chain
of delegation. The University has formal authority to determine the academic progress of
students either because of the status of the University as a degree-awarding authority or
because of delegation to the University by another Awarding Body. Subject to retaining
ultimate responsibility for the exercise of such authority, the University’s Board of Governors
delegates academic authority to its Academic Board. In turn, the Academic Board delegates
to each Assessment Board the authority and responsibility for determining the academic
progress of students.
1.0
Definition
1.1
Academic misconduct is defined by the University as any activity or attempted
activity which gives an unfair advantage to one or more students over their
peers. Appendix 2 provides illustrative definitions and examples.
2.0
Guiding Principles for the Regulations
2.1
The University/collaborative partners aim to educate students on how to
develop good academic practice and writing skills. The development of key
skills has been a priority area within the University’s Learning, Teaching and
Assessment Strategy [LTAS] for several years and is scrutinised within
programme approval. As part of this philosophy to help students avoid
academic misconduct and also warn of the consequences of committing
academic misconduct, the University provides the following support:




Advice and guidance from The Link based in the Students’ Union and/or
Student Services Department.
Learning Hub, where academic tutors provide writing and study skills
support.
Educational media campaigns.
Facility for students and staff to use plagiarism e-detection software (see
Appendix 1).
2.2
The assessment of students as regards their achievement of learning
outcomes is based on the principle that, unless clearly stated otherwise in the
assessment instructions, the work undertaken by a student for assessment
has been carried out by that student and is their own work.
2.3
The work submitted by a student for assessment must therefore have been
carried out by the student. Work presented in such a way that it fails to clearly
identify the work done by others may therefore attract the charge of academic
misconduct.
2 of 52
2.4
Any essays, dissertations or other assessed work undertaken must be a
student’s own work and any passages quoted, paraphrased or opinions relied
upon must be properly attributed.
2.5
Equally, if a student uses images, designs, plans, diagrams, computer code or
other such media which have been originated by someone else, the student
must specify the source.
2.6
The University accepts that a student’s work may be inspired by what they
have read, but a student must not copy or paraphrase whole sentences,
paragraphs or parts of someone else’s work without proper
acknowledgement.
2.7
Where a student reproduces someone else’s ideas, but in their own words to
a greater or lesser extent (or paraphrasing), they must cite the original source
and, in the case of direct quotes, include the page number. If a student is in
any doubt as to how to reference material they must consult a member of
academic staff.
2.8
Where an element of group work is an appropriate part of the assessment
methodology, the assessment instructions must make clear the nature,
content and extent of such group based activity.
2.9
Staff are required to give students specific instructions on when, how and in
what form they should submit/undertake any assessment and students are
encouraged to seek clarification.
2.10
The conduct of students in an examination setting must be such that there
must be no suspicion that the work submitted is not their own, nor that they
have sought to gain an unfair advantage over other students sitting an
examination by committing academic misconduct. The University therefore
operates specific instructions relating to the conduct of Invigilators and
students in examination settings. Appendix 3 provides the Instructions to
Examination Invigilators and Appendix 4 is the Instructions to Students
Undertaking Examinations.
2.11
Invigilators shall act within the scope of these regulations (see Appendix 3),
but given the complexity of certain circumstances of academic misconduct,
Invigilators are advised to use their own judgement and discretion. The
decision of the Senior Invigilator on whether or not academic misconduct has
occurred must not be contested in the Examination Room.
2.12
Following an incident, and until the matter has been resolved, the Senior
Invigilator and any Assistant Invigilators involved in the incident shall not
engage in conversation with the student(s) concerned regarding the alleged
academic misconduct unless a third party is present (see Appendix 3).
2.13
Students accused of academic misconduct shall be innocent until judged to
be guilty following the process set out below. Normally, students will be
allowed to progress with their academic studies until the conclusion of
3 of 52
procedures under the Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught
Components and Programmes).
However, where as a consequence of being found guilty of academic
misconduct a student needs to be re-assessed, this will take place at the next
available opportunity but may impose a delay in progression.
Students subject to professional body requirements may be required to
suspend their studies subject to an outcome under this procedure. The
Professional or Statutory, Regulatory Body [PSRB] requirements are referred
to in programme approval documentation. See section 10.3 in the main body
of these regulations.
2.14
Students accused of academic misconduct shall have the right to be made
aware of the accusation and challenge that accusation.
2.15
The burden of proof shall be based on clear, strong and cogent evidence.
2.16
The burden of proof shall rest with the University.
2.17
Where a student is found guilty of academic misconduct at any stage, then a
record will be kept of this and any associated penalty on SITS. [Note: SITS is
the name of the University’s electronic student record.] One complete set of
papers relating to each proven case will be retained in a separate file by the
School to be referred to only in the event that a subsequent action, e.g. a
request for a review by the student, necessitates reference to this material.
2.18
Where a case is not proven, or withdrawn at Stage 1 and the student is
therefore not found guilty, no detailed record of any sort will be kept on SITS
or the student’s file. However, anonymous statistical data on unproven Stage
1 and Stage 2 cases will be kept by the School in line with current guidance
from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education [QAA].
With reference to unproven or withdrawn Stage 2 cases, one set of papers will
be filed separately by the School and referred to only in the event of a
subsequent action requiring a judgement to be made about the conduct of the
case. These papers will be kept for a period of four months from the date of
the Stage 2 Hearing and thereafter destroyed by the School.
2.19
At the commencement of their programme, students must be advised of the
University procedure for dealing with alleged academic misconduct and the
penalties which may be imposed if they are found guilty of academic
misconduct.
2.20
Programme handbooks must make reference to the dangers and penalties of
academic misconduct, and these references must be reinforced orally by staff.
The extract inserted into handbooks is provided by the University. Schools/
collaborative partners are not at liberty to alter this text.
4 of 52
2.21
Staff who suspect that academic misconduct has taken place shall pursue the
process outlined in the Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught
Components and Programmes).
2.22
The Ombuds Office can provide advice to staff and students regarding the
Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and
Programmes).
2.23
All communication including letters, evidence and invitations will, wherever
possible, be sent via email.
2.24
Staff who sit as Panel members at Stages 1 and 2 must have had no previous
involvement in the student’s case.
3.0
Stages of the Process
3.1
The University recognises three broad types of academic misconduct
offences; academic negligence, academic malpractice and academic
cheating. Academic negligence is the least serious, and academic cheating
the most serious. Appendix 2 provides a description of each type of offence
and guidance for members of staff to assist them in deciding which type of
offence has occurred.
The member of staff suspecting academic misconduct must first arrange to
check SITS to identify whether the student has been found guilty of a previous
academic misconduct offence and thereafter refer back to Appendix 2, as this
may determine which stage should be undertaken. The member of staff
should then consult with the relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or
nominee before taking any action whatsoever. Together they will make a
decision on the type of alleged offence and determine the stage to be
undertaken.
3.2
There are three stages for dealing with allegations of academic misconduct
i.e., Informal Stage, Stage 1 and Stage 2. The Informal Stage is only
applicable to students on their first suspected academic negligence offence.
Stage 1 will be used for dealing with first cases of alleged academic
malpractice offences.
Stage 2 will be used for dealing with all second and subsequent offences of
academic malpractice, all academic cheating offences and exceptional cases.
(See Appendix 5 for further details.)
In circumstances as defined in section 6.2 of the main body of these
regulations, students may make written representation requesting a University
Academic Misconduct Review Panel to review a recommendation from Stage
2 as to whether or not academic misconduct has occurred. See Appendix 9.
5 of 52
Following consultation with the relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or
nominee as identified in section 3.1 above, collaborative partners will conduct
the Informal Stage and Stage 1 at their institution. Relevant staff at
collaborative partner institutions will be provided with the Standard
Administrative Procedures [SAPs] to support these regulations and be
provided with staff development and training and ongoing support. All Stage 2
proceedings will be conducted by the relevant School and the Review Stage
by the University.
3.3
The University has designed its procedures around the type of offence and
any previous record of offences which may exist. The details are set out in
Appendix 2.
3.4
Students must be notified of the allegation of academic misconduct, kept
informed throughout, and receive confirmation of the outcome of the
proceedings. The procedures for the Informal Stage, Stage 1 and Stage 2 are
set out in Appendices 6, 7 and 8 respectively.
3.5
These regulations apply to all University students, except those students
studying on postgraduate research programmes. The administrative
processes and timescales may depend on where the student is living when
required to attend the University regarding an academic misconduct
allegation. The University/collaborative partner will endeavour to make
reasonable adjustments, in consultation with the Students’ Union, to ensure
that the process is fair to all parties.
3.6
The Informal Stage, Stages 1 and 2 must be held as soon as possible
following the allegation of academic misconduct.
3.7
Informal Stage
This is an informal meeting intended to deal with first alleged cases of
academic negligence. It is intended primarily as an educational/warning route
and although penalties may be imposed they will be of a relatively minor
nature. Please refer to Appendix 6 for recommended guidance for the
preparation and conduct of the Informal Stage.
3.8
Stage 1
This is a meeting to consider an alleged academic misconduct case and will
normally be applied in one or more of the following circumstances:


Any cases progressed from the Informal Stage.
First case of alleged academic malpractice. (NOTE: this includes second
and subsequent cases of academic negligence which are classed as
academic malpractice.)
If an academic misconduct case is proven at Stage 1, then a decision on the
appropriate penalty will be made at this point and the decision reported for
information to the relevant Module Assessment Board.
6 of 52
See Appendix 7 for recommended guidance for the preparation and conduct
of a School Academic Misconduct Stage 1 Meeting and notification process.
3.9
Stage 2
This is a formal hearing of an academic misconduct case and will normally be
applied in one or more of the following circumstances:
 Any cases progressed from the Informal Stage or Stage 1.
 Alleged cases of academic cheating.
 Second and subsequent occurrences of academic malpractice.
 Exceptional Cases (see Appendix 5).
If a case is proven at Stage 2, then a recommendation on the appropriate
penalty will be made at this point. This will be recommended to the relevant
Module Assessment Board, who will make the final decision on the penalty. A
special Module Assessment Board can be arranged for this purpose. Module
Assessment Boards can only agree or reduce the recommended penalty.
Module Assessment Boards are not allowed to change the decision on
whether academic misconduct has occurred.
See Appendix 8 for recommended guidance for the preparation and conduct
of a School Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing and notification process.
4.0
Viewing the alleged Academic Misconduct
Schools/collaborative partners will make all reasonable efforts to provide
students with a copy of the original work in which the student is alleged to
have committed academic misconduct prior to either the Stage 1 Meeting or
Stage 2 Hearing, but this may not always be possible due to the volume of
documentation or the nature of the academic misconduct.
Students wishing to view the alleged work, in which academic misconduct is
suspected in advance of either the Stage 1 Meeting or Stage 2 Hearing, must
contact the relevant School Senior Administrator to arrange a viewing. The
student may be accompanied by a friend or a representative from the
Students’ Union. No documentation can be removed from the premises and
during this viewing a member of staff will be in attendance at all times as an
observer only. The observer shall not comment or provide advice on the
allegation or associated procedures.
5.0
Exceptional Cases Procedure
When an academic judgement has been made that an exceptional case has
arisen where it is reasonable to believe that a submitted assessment is not a
student’s own work (for example, so inconsistent with previous performance
as to suggest that it has not been produced by the student concerned) but the
sources from which the work might have been derived cannot be located, then
7 of 52
the Exceptional Cases Procedure may be initiated in full consultation with the
relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee (See Appendix 5.) The
University’s Assessment Regulations state the University’s right to conduct a
viva at any stage of a student’s study and this right can be exercised within
the Exceptional Cases Procedure.
As part of the information given to students about academic misconduct, they
must be informed of the Exceptional Cases Procedure and informed that it is
in their interests to retain materials used in developing a submission, such as
would indicate its development and the work they have done in its
preparation.
6.0
Review Stage
6.1
This is a formal review, at the request of the student, of the decision of a
School Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing as to whether or not academic
misconduct has occurred. The Review Panel does not have the authority to
change the penalty. See Appendix 9 for recommended guidance for the
preparation and conduct of a University Academic Misconduct Review Panel
and notification process.
6.2
Applications for a review of the decision as to whether academic misconduct
has occurred can only be made on the following grounds:
6.2.1 That the decision that academic misconduct has occurred reached by
the Stage 2 Hearing was wholly inconsistent and/or unsupported by
evidence presented;
or
6.2.2 That there was a material and/or procedural irregularity by the Stage 2
Hearing which has prejudiced the student’s case;
or
6.2.3 Additional evidence has come to light since the decision of the Stage 2
Hearing, which could not have been expected to have been produced
at the time of the consideration of the case.
A student requesting a review must submit a written application to the
Ombuds Officer within 15 working days of the Stage 2 Hearing. Only in
extenuating circumstances will late applications be considered and in any
event no later than 3 months from the date of the Stage 2 Hearing.
6.3
Students awaiting the outcome of a review are allowed to continue with their
programme of study, pending the outcome of the Review. However, this is at
the student's risk and if the outcome of the Review is to confirm a decision to
withdraw the student from their programme of study (Penalty 5), then any
credits achieved in relation to assessments submitted after the Stage 2
Hearing will be removed from the student's record.
8 of 52
6.4
Students may not challenge academic judgement and the decision of the
University Academic Misconduct Review Panel is not subject to further
internal appeal.
7.0
Module Assessment Boards
See sections 3.8 and 3.9 in the main body of these Regulations for the
process of reporting and recommending proven academic misconduct
decisions to the relevant Module Assessment Board.
8.0
Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education
A student who is dissatisfied with the decision of the University Academic
Misconduct Review Panel, may, in circumstances identified in the Higher
Education Act 2004, refer his/her complaint to the Independent Adjudicator for
Higher Education in England and Wales. Information on this facility is
available at www.oiahe.org.uk.
9.0
Advice to Students
At all stages, the students must be advised as to the range of services
available from Student Services Department and The Link based in the
Students’ Union, and must be encouraged to consult with them.
10.0
Range of Penalties
10.1 Appendix 2 indicates the penalties appropriate to each type of offence and
takes into account previous academic misconduct offences.
10.2
Students who commit multiple offences of academic misconduct will put
themselves in a position where they may be withdrawn from their programme
of study. The student will exit the programme gaining an award appropriate to
their credit record.
10.3
Where a student is pursuing a programme of study leading to professional
registration/qualification and/or providing a licence to practice, then it is
possible that a single proven instance of academic misconduct will prevent
that student obtaining the relevant licence. If a student is found guilty of
academic misconduct, the usual penalty for that offence must be identified.
However, under certain circumstances, before that penalty is implemented, it
may be necessary to initiate proceedings using Programme or School specific
regulations dealing with professional conduct issues and/or inform relevant
PSRB(s) of the proven academic misconduct. This may result in a
recommendation to the relevant Progression/Award Assessment Board that
the student is withdrawn from the programme and the relevant
Progression/Award Assessment Board may terminate the student’s
programme of study forthwith. The student will exit the programme gaining an
9 of 52
award appropriate to their credit record. See also section 2.13 in the main
body of these regulations.
10.4
Where a student, having been found guilty of academic misconduct,
subsequently fails the module concerned then that specific module cannot be
compensated.
10.5
In the event of the application of sections 10.2 or 10.3 above the student will
not be allowed to study additional credits to complete the award.
LIST OF APPENDICES
[hyperlinkedplease click on
page no]
Appendix 1 Plagiarism E-Detection
Appendix 2
11
Definitions, Examples and Types of Academic
Misconduct
13
Appendix 3 Instructions to Examination Invigilators
22
Appendix 4 Instructions to Students undertaking Examinations
31
Appendix 5 Exceptional Cases Procedure
35
Recommended Guidance for the Preparation and
Appendix 6 Conduct of an Informal Stage Academic Misconduct
Meeting
36
Appendix 7
Format for the Preparation and Conduct of a School
Academic Misconduct Stage 1 Meeting
39
Appendix 8
Format for the Preparation and Conduct of a School
Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing
43
Format for the Preparation and Conduct of a
Appendix 9 University Academic Misconduct Review Panel
Hearing
10 of 52
48
APPENDIX 1
PLAGIARISM E-DETECTION
1.0
The University will allow both students and staff the opportunity to make use
of software designed to detect the possibility of plagiarism.
2.0
The University accepts that such software does not itself prove plagiarism, nor
will any single piece of software deal with all types of plagiarism. The software
provides information on which judgements have to be made within the existing
Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and
Programmes).
3.0
Providing students with the opportunity to make use of e-detection software at
an early stage of their learning career and allowing them to make such use
thereafter as they wish, is an important part of the process of educating
students as to the nature of academic misconduct and in helping them to
avoid it.
4.0
For students studying 120 credits or more, Schools/collaborative partners
must identify at least one module early on in a student’s study career (e.g. a
Level 4 Key Skills Module for undergraduate students) where, as part of the
module, students will use Turnitin, or such other e-detection software that a
School/Subject Group considers appropriate, on an individual or group basis.
If a student is studying less than 120 credits, then the student must be
provided with guidance on how they can access such software and also on
how to avoid academic misconduct - see section 2.1 in the main body of these
regulations.
Particular attention must be paid to the needs of postgraduate students
studying at the University for the first time, and the needs of students with
advanced standing. The intention will be to identify good practice in the
avoidance of academic misconduct and to ensure that students are
sufficiently familiar with e-detection software to allow them to make use of it
subsequently to check their own work.
Schools must decide where else, if anywhere, in a student’s programme of
study they wish to either make the use of e-detection software a requirement
or, alternatively, strongly recommend its use by students.
5.0
Schools/collaborative partners must identify any specific modules where the
use of e-detection software should become routine. Schools/collaborative
partners may also decide, from time-to-time, to target specific modules, either
as regards all assessed work or via a sampling process. Any suspected cases
of plagiarism picked up as a result of such a targeted campaign will be dealt
with via the Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught
Components and Programmes). Over and above this, staff may make use of
e-detection software as they wish. Schools/collaborative partners must
11 of 52
periodically review the intensity of staff usage, with a view to making
recommendations on consistency.
6.0
Students must be reminded from time-to-time that they are encouraged to
make use of e-detection software if they so wish and that staff will make use
of it on an ongoing basis.
7.0
Schools/collaborative partners may specify the form of submission of
assignments in such ways as to facilitate submission to e-detection
procedures (for example one paper copy and one electronic copy).
12 of 52
APPENDIX 2
DEFINITION, EXAMPLES AND TYPES OF ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
1.0
Definition
1.1 Academic Misconduct
Academic misconduct is defined by the University as any activity, or
attempted activity, which gives an unfair advantage to one or more students
over their peers.
The definitions and descriptions in this Appendix are indicative and not
exhaustive. The University will periodically review the utility of the types of
offence within its process and will consider, on the basis of previous cases,
any perceived need to revise these types or their descriptions.
1.2 Nominee
The definition of a nominee within these regulations is a person nominated by
either the Deputy/Assistant Dean of a School or Deputy Vice Chancellor
(Partnerships & Standards) to act on their behalf. For example the nominee
of the Deputy/Assistant Dean of a School can be the Academic Conduct
Coordinator
2.0
Decision Making
Decisions on the type of academic misconduct suspected need to be made on
a case-by-case basis by staff in the light of the circumstances of each case
and all the relevant and available evidence. What follows should be seen by
way of guidelines only.
In making such decisions, interpreting the guidelines and
deciding/recommending appropriate penalties, the following factors may need
to be considered:
2.1
Continuity: the continued commission of academic misconduct offences
should normally be dealt with more severely than a single act. NOTE: where a
student commits (for the first time) multiple acts of the same offence at the
same time, even if in different assessments or modules, then this will normally
be regarded as a single act on the basis that the student may not have been
aware of the issues. However, where multiple acts occur as a second or
subsequent offence they need not be treated as a single act.
2.2
Scale and Extent: An academic misconduct offence may relate to a very
small proportion of a piece of assessed work, (for example in an essay a few
lines or a single paragraph) or may be present in a large scale throughout the
whole of an assignment.
13 of 52
2.3
Theft of Materials: where another person’s assessed work has been
stolen and effectively used without their permission, or some part of a piece of
work has been stolen, for example a set of results, a piece of code etc., then
this may be dealt with more severely.
14 of 52
3.0
Table of Definitions, Examples and Types of Academic Misconduct
The University recognises three broad types of academic misconduct, as outlined in the table below, which includes examples, the
stage to be undertaken and the recommended penalty.
NOTE: If a student has been found guilty under the previous Regulations relating to Plagiarism & Cheating (Taught Programmes)
pre September 2009 at either formal Stage 1 or Stage 2, this occurrence(s) will be taken into account if a student is suspected of
academic misconduct under these Regulations
Type
Academic
Negligence
(regarded as the least
serious)
Academic
Malpractice
Examples
 First academic misconduct offence, for
example:
Plagiarism: (see section 5.0 of this Appendix).
 Small in scale and may be present in only
part of the work –
 Related only to the work of the individual
student and not the work of others.
 Ignorance: Could be considered to have
resulted from ignorance of requirements or a
misunderstanding, or it could be that an
attempt to follow good practice has failed,
for example inappropriate use of secondary
sources.
 Careless: May be considered to be due to
lack of care and forgetfulness.
Stage
Informal
 Plagiarism: (see section 5.0 of this Appendix)
 Systematic and extensive oversight of
all normal academic requirements, e.g.,
extensive paraphrasing with no attempt to
acknowledge sources.
 Systematic failure to reference, as
opposed simply to poor referencing.
 Failure to follow tutor instructions as
First
offence of
Academic
Malpractice
Stage 1
15 of 52
Recommended Penalty
Penalty 1
 Give appropriate advice and guidance on
how to avoid academic misconduct and
refer student to the Learning Hub.
 Enter the occurrence onto SITS.
 Award a mark for the assessment (or
components) ignoring the academic
misconduct issues.
Penalty 2
 Give appropriate advice and guidance on
how to avoid academic misconduct and
refer student to the Learning Hub.
 Enter offence onto SITS.
 The student to re-submit the entire piece
regards extent and limit of any group work.
 Second and subsequent alleged offences
that would normally have been classified as
academic negligence.
 Self Plagiarism: Submitting work which is in
whole or part identical to work already submitted
by that student for another assignment
of assessment in question, having rectified
the academic misconduct issues and will
receive a result capped at the pass mark
for the component.
 If the re-submitted work receives a fail
mark or the student chooses not to resubmit the standard assessment
regulations will apply.
Second
and
subsequent
Offences
Stage 2
Penalty 3 - 2nd Offence
 Enter offence onto SITS.
 Advise the student that they are allowed
one re-assessment opportunity (first sit
only – see section 6 in this Appendix) to
gain a result capped at the pass mark for
the component. Compensation is not
allowed.

Failure to comply will result in failure
of the assessment with no further
opportunity other than re-study to
make good.
Penalty 4 – 3rd Offence
 Enter offence onto SITS.
 Advise the student that there is no reassessment opportunity and a mark of
zero for the Module will be recorded.
 The student will be allowed to re-study, or
take an alternative module if permitted.
16 of 52
Penalty 5 – 4th Offence
 Award a mark of zero for the module.
 Enter the offence on SITS.
 Inform the student that there is no reassessment opportunity and no
opportunity to repeat the module or
complete an alternative module.
Academic
Cheating
(regarded as the most
serious)
 Plagiarism in a Dissertation module or
equivalent (i.e. any Level 7 or 8
Dissertation/Project module, any Level 6
module requiring independent study and any
taught level 8 module).
 Collusion: Collusion exists where a student:
 Submits as entirely their own, with intention
to gain unfair advantage, work done in
conjunction with another, when this is not a
requirement of the assessment.
 Permits another student to copy all or part
of their work and the latter student then
submits it as their own unaided work.
 Theft.
 Falsification of results/data: The presentation
of data in laboratory reports, projects etc.,
based on experimental work falsely purported to
have been carried out by the student, or
obtained by unfair means. This also includes
the manipulation, tampering with and adding of
data in experimental or similar situations.
17 of 52
All stage 2
 Withdraw the student from the programme
of study. Student retains credits gained up
to that point of study, with any award that
this may lead to.
Penalty 3 - 1st offence
 Enter offence onto SITS.
 Advise the student that they are allowed
one re-assessment opportunity (first sit
only) to gain a result capped at the pass
mark for the component.

Failure to comply will result in failure
of the assessment with no further
opportunity other than re-study.
Penalty 4 – 1st or 2nd offence
 Enter offence onto SITS.
 Advise the student that there is no reassessment opportunity and a mark of
zero for the module will be recorded.
 The student will be allowed to re-study, or
 Personation : The legal term for what is usually
referred to as ‘impersonation’. Personation is
thus the assumption by one person of the
identity of another person with intent to deceive
or to gain unfair advantage. It may exist where:
 One person assumes the identity of a
student, with the intention of gaining unfair
advantage for that student.
 The student is knowingly and willingly
impersonated by another with the intention
of gaining unfair advantage for themselves
 Modification: The submission of a piece of
work known to have been originated by another
but which the student has deliberately modified
to make it appear as if it was their own piece of
work.
 Unauthorised possession of confidential
staff materials relating to an assessment, such
as would give the student an unfair advantage.
 Any attempt to interfere with or revise
recorded marks.
 Examination Irregularities, which may include
the following:
 Communicating with or copying from any
other students during an examination.
 Communicating during an examination with
any person other than an authorised
member of staff.
 Taking any written, printed materials or
electronically stored information into the
examination room, unless expressly
permitted by the examination or programme
regulations.
 Gaining access to any unauthorised
material relating to an examination during or
18 of 52
take an alternative module if permitted.
Penalty 5 – 3rd offence
 Award a mark of zero for the module.
 Enter the offence on SITS.
 Inform the student that there is no reassessment opportunity and no
opportunity to repeat the module or
complete an alternative module.
 Withdraw the student from the programme
of study. Student retains credits gained up
to that point of study, with any award that
this may lead to.







before the examination.
 Obtaining a copy of an ‘unseen’
examination question paper in advance of
the date and time for its authorised release.
 Breach of the regulations with reference to
the ‘Instructions to Students undertaking
Examinations’.
Purchase/commissioning of a piece of work
from another party which is passed off as their
own work.
Submitting a fraudulent case of mitigating
circumstances.
Assisting other students to commit an
academic offence.
Bribery: The offering of money or other
incentives to persuade a person to influence a
behaviour which gives them an unfair
advantage over their peers.
Any other practice which the School Academic
Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing considers to be
cheating.
Second and Subsequent proven cases of
Academic Malpractice.
Exceptional Cases. (see Appendix 5.0)
NOTE: Plagiarism can occur in varying degrees of seriousness throughout all types. Section 5.0 in this Appendix provides a more
detailed definition of Plagiarism.
19 of 52
4.0
Penalties by Type and Number of Academic Misconduct Offences
Academic
Negligence
First Offence
Penalty 1
via Informal
Stage
Academic
Malpractice
First Offence
Penalty 2
via Stage 1
Academic
Cheating
Second Offence
Penalty 3
via Stage 2
Third Offence
Penalty 4
via Stage 2
Fourth Offence
Penalty 5
via Stage 2
First Offence
Penalty 3 or 4
via Stage 2
Second Offence
Penalty 4
via Stage 2
Third Offence
Penalty 5
via Stage 2
20 of 52
5.0
Definition of Plagiarism
‘The incorporation of another’s work in an assessment without proper
acknowledgement’.
Examples of plagiarism which can occur in varying degrees within all the three
types in Section 3.0 of this Appendix are as follows:








The inclusion in a student’s work of more than a single phrase from
another’s work without the use of quotation marks and
acknowledgement of the sources.
The summarising of another’s work by simply changing a few words or
altering the order of presentation without acknowledgement.
Reproducing another person’s work or ideas in a student’s own words
without acknowledgement.
The unauthorised use of the ideas of another person without
acknowledgement of the source.
Copying the work of another student, with or without the student’s
knowledge or agreement.
Submitting work which is in whole or part identical to work already
submitted by that student for another assignment.
Commissioning of a piece of work prepared by one or more others but
submitted by the student as if it was their own.
Purchase of another’s work from any source.
Proper acknowledgement means that when a student is copying from another
source, that section must appear in quotation marks with an
acknowledgement of the source by the provision of a detailed reference and
page number. Where the student is reproducing someone’s ideas, but in their
own words to a greater or lesser extent (or paraphrasing), the student must
cite the original source and, in the case of direct quotes, include the page
number. If the student is in any doubt as to how to reference material, they
must consult their Tutor. Advice is also available from the Learning Hub or The
Link based in the Students’ Union.
6.0
Re-Assessment
The availability of a re-assessment is dependent upon the piece of
assessment in question being a first submission, i.e. a student cannot gain a
re-assessment opportunity following an academic misconduct offence if they
would not have normally been considered for a re-assessment opportunity by
the Module Assessment Board.
7.0
Discretion on Penalties
Section 4.0 of this Appendix is a schematic of what penalties would normally
be expected. However less serious penalties may be imposed depending on
the circumstances of specific cases and Stage 2 proceedings may impose
lesser penalties where they consider this to be appropriate.
21 of 52
APPENDIX 3
INSTRUCTIONS TO EXAMINATION INVIGILATORS
NOTE: Where reference to Examinations Office, Teesside University Smart Card
[TUSC], Head of Learning Environment etc. appears below, the equivalent
will apply at collaborative partner institutions and it will be the responsibility
of the collaborative partner to advise the Invigilator on the alternative
arrangements.
1.0
General
1.1
There must always be at least two Invigilators in the Examination Room,
except when an Invigilator needs to accompany a student from the room, or in
the case of specific special needs examinations.
1.2
An Invigilator will be nominated as the Senior Invigilator by the Head of
Learning Environment; other Invigilators will assist the Senior Invigilator.
1.3
If an Invigilator finds it essential to interpret or waive these Instructions, the
incident must be fully documented on the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form and
drawn to the attention of the Head of Learning Environment.
2.0
Collection of Examination Materials
The Senior Invigilator is responsible for the collection of the following from the
Examinations Office (Room M206b) 30 minutes before the scheduled start of
the examination, except in the case of evening examinations, when
examination materials must be collected from the Examinations Office (Room
M206b) between 4.30pm and 5.00pm:





3.0
Examination materials.
Senior Invigilator’s report form.
Senior Invigilator’s incident report form.
Seating plan.
Receipts.
Preparation of Examination Room
The Senior Invigilator is responsible for ensuring that the seating arrangement
is satisfactory, all desks are numbered, and for ensuring the distribution of all
examination materials, other than the question papers, before the students
are admitted. Paper for rough work must not be distributed.
The Senior Invigilator must ensure that a copy of the ‘Instructions to Students
Undertaking Examinations’ is posted in a prominent position outside the
Examination Room.
22 of 52
4.0
Admission of Students
The Senior Invigilator is responsible for the following:
4.1
Admitting the students to the Examination Room, normally not more than 10
minutes before the scheduled start of the examination, and instructing
students to be silent. Students are not allowed to bring a child or pet in to the
Examination Room, nor is the child or pet allowed to be left unattended
outside the Examination Room.
4.2
Students should only take into the Examination Room those essential
items needed to complete the examination and these must be contained
in a transparent pencil case or small transparent plastic bag. The Senior
Invigilator should instruct students to leave all unauthorised material including
bags, mobile telephones, pagers, mobile devices, coats and other belongings
in a specific part of the Examination Room. The place appointed by the
Senior Invigilator for the deposit of unauthorised materials must be identified
on the Seating Plan and must be in full view of the Invigilators. Mobile
telephones, pagers, mobile devices or any other similar device must be
switched off. The University does not accept liability for any losses resulting
from this instruction. All items brought into an Examination Room by a
student are at the sole risk of that student and therefore, students have been
advised not to bring valuable items into an Examination Room. Before the
examination commences, students must place all essential equipment on their
desk and other items such as calculator cases and spectacle cases, must be
placed (and all similar unauthorised small items) on the floor under their
desks. The judgement of the Senior Invigilator on what constitutes
unauthorised material is final, subject to:
4.2.1
Any special instructions on the question paper.
4.2.2
Any general regulations approved by the appropriate Assessment
Board and notified to the Head of Learning Environment and
Invigilators.
4.3
Ensuring that students are not permitted to use dictionaries unless approval to
do so has been granted by the University’s Variance Sub- Committee and
notification subsequently made to Invigilators.
4.4
Instructing students to place their TUSC or equivalent face upwards on the
desk at which they are sitting their examination (see section 9.9 in this
Appendix).
4.5
Instructing students to complete in full the attendance card and the front
covers of answer scripts. Students must be reminded to include their desk
number on the attendance card and on the front cover of their answer scripts.
4.6
Ensuring that students complete their name (then fold over the removable
strip) on the front cover of the answer script, and any supplementary sheets.
Students may also be required to complete their Student Enrolment Number
on the front cover of the answer script.
23 of 52
4.7
Ensuring that in examinations with durations that necessitate a break during
which time bags, books, notes or similar items must be left in the Examination
Room, that the University makes reasonable efforts to ensure that such
possessions remain secure. However, the exclusion of the liability for
valuable items referred to above will apply to such possessions. Furthermore,
the University’s liability for loss or damage to a student’s possessions will be
limited solely to a proven loss of items necessary for the examination.
Students have been advised of this restricted liability but must also be so
reminded immediately before leaving the Examination Room for the break.
4.8
The Senior Invigilator has the authority to require the withdrawal of a student
from the Examination Room if they have reasonable grounds to believe that
the student may be in receipt of an ‘Exclusion’ letter from the Vice-Chancellor.
5.0
Starting the Examination
The Senior Invigilator is responsible for the following:
5.1
Ensuring that all unauthorised persons have left the Examination Room
before the examination is started.
5.2
Distributing question papers, as quickly as possible, immediately prior to the
start of the examination.
5.3
Starting the examination promptly at the scheduled time and announcing the
duration of the examination.
5.4
Recording the starting time on the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form.
5.5
Ensuring the collection of completed attendance cards immediately after the
start of the examination, checking that the number of collected cards
corresponds with the number of students present, and noting the number of
students present on to the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form relevant to the
examination.
5.6
Students must be asked to display their TUSC (or equivalent) identification as
they enter an examination room. Students who do not provide appropriate
identification must not be allowed to enter the Examination Room until
appropriate identification is provided and then only in the timescales as cited
in Paragraphs 6.1.1 and 6.1.2. During the examination, check all TUSCs or
equivalent to ensure that the TUSC/equivalent matches the attendance card
and the student seated at the desk. (See section 9.9 in this appendix.) Once
verification has taken place remove the attendance card from the student.
24 of 52
6.0
Students arriving Late
6.1
Students arriving late for an examination must be permitted to enter the
Examination Room providing they arrive no later than the times stipulated for
the relevant examination duration:
6.1.1 For an examination with a duration of 1½ hours or more, students can
be admitted during the first 30 minutes.
6.1.2 For an examination with a duration of more than 1½ hours, students
can be admitted during the first 60 minutes.
6.2
Unless explicitly provided for by the appropriate Assessment Board, late
students must not be allowed additional time in which to complete the
examination.
6.3
The time of arrival of any late student must be noted on the Senior Invigilator’s
Report Form. A student arriving more than 30 minutes late is required to
inform an Invigilator of the reason for lateness, and this reason must also be
noted.
6.4
The TUSC/equivalent must be checked for all late candidates (see section 9.9
in this Appendix).
7.0
Smoking, Eating & Drinking
Smoking, eating and alcoholic beverages are forbidden in the Examination
Room, unless prior arrangements have been made in relation to the medical
needs of a student. Students may bring a small bottle of water in a clear
container.
8.0
Disturbance of Students
8.1
All Invigilators are responsible for minimising disturbance within the
Examination Room.
8.2
Invigilators must only communicate with each other when it is essential to do
so.
8.3
Students must not communicate with other students, or use mobile
telephones, pagers, mobile devices or any other similar devices during an
examination. Students are also required to behave in a quiet and orderly
manner. Senior Invigilators have the authority to report, or remove, a student
from the Examination Room who is acting in an inappropriate manner. The
Invigilators are given discretion to interpret this regulation. Any allegations of
inappropriate behaviour may lead to disciplinary action in accordance with the
University’s Student Disciplinary Regulations.
25 of 52
9.0
Irregularities
9.1
Constant vigilance is essential. Invigilators must ensure that students do not
commit an act of academic misconduct. Any breach of the instructions issued
to students must be reported to the Head of Learning Environment
immediately, who will advise the Ombuds Officer in the Ombuds Office, to be
progressed in accordance with the Regulations relating to Academic
Misconduct (Taught Components and Programmes).
9.2
Academic misconduct may be defined as: Engaging in any action which
results in an unfair advantage over other students taking the same
assessment. Cheating in examinations is classed as academic misconduct
and definitions of this are provided in Appendix 2 of the Regulations relating to
Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and Programmes). This may
include the following:
9.2.1 Communicating with or copying from any other students during an
examination except where regulations specifically allow such
communication.
9.2.2 Communicating during an examination with any person other than an
authorised member of staff.
9.2.3 Taking any written, printed materials or electronically stored information
into the Examination Room, unless expressly permitted by the
examination or programme regulations that have been notified to the
Senior Invigilator.
9.2.4 Gaining access to unauthorised material relating to the examination
during or before the examination.
9.2.5 Obtaining a copy of an ‘unseen’ examination question paper in advance
of the date and time authorised for its release.
9.2.6 Personation: The legal term for impersonating another person with the
intention to deceive or gain unfair advantage.
9.3
Unauthorised Materials: Within the Examination Room, the decision of the
Senior Invigilator will be final regarding what constitutes unauthorised or
contraband materials. Any attempt by a student to challenge the decision of
the Senior Invigilator in the Examination Room regarding what constitutes an
unauthorised or contraband item will be deemed misconduct and may be
subject to action under the regulations relating to Student Discipline (on
grounds other than an unsatisfactory standard of work).
9.4
At all times, Invigilators must act with the utmost circumspection particularly
in handling apparent irregularities. It must be remembered that there may be
an innocent explanation of a student’s suspicious conduct.
26 of 52
9.5
Any student suspected of contravening the Instructions to Students
Undertaking Examinations must be approached immediately by two
Invigilators and any unauthorised material confiscated. If personal
possessions are involved then a receipt must be given to the student by the
Senior Invigilator. If material evidence is not confiscated, it may be difficult at
a later stage to prove that an incident has taken place. The student’s current
location in his or her answer script must be marked together with the date,
exact time and signature of the two Invigilators.
Before leaving the Examination Room, the student must be informed by the
Senior Invigilator that the incident will be reported to the Head of Learning
Environment and be deemed academic misconduct and may be subject to
action under the Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught
Components and Programmes).
9.6
All students disturbed by the incident (including any not directly involved) must
be informed that they will be allowed additional time at the end of the
examination as compensation. The amount of additional time is at the
discretion of the Senior Invigilator who must consider whether settling-down
time should be allowed in addition to the actual time lost.
9.7
A full report on the incident must be written immediately after the examination
by the Senior Invigilator, on an Incident Report Form and attached to the
Senior Invigilator’s Report Form, including details of any additional time
allowed. The Incident Report Form must contain a Seating Plan that indicates
the position of the student, the Invigilators and any other possible witnesses to
the incident. The Incident Report Form must be signed and dated by the
Senior Invigilator and the Assistant Invigilator who approached the student.
NOTE: If the appropriate Report Form(s) is not available, the Senior Invigilator
must write the pertinent details of the incident on a blank sheet of paper.
9.8
The Senior Invigilator shall pass the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form and the
Incident Report Form immediately after the examination to the Examinations
Office (Room M206b), who will forward to the Ombuds Officer in the Ombuds
Office.
9.9
Any student unable to produce their TUSC will not be admitted to the
Examination Room. The student will be asked to provide some alternative
form of photographic identification before admittance will be permitted. Any
irregularities with TUSC/equivalent matching the student seated at a desk or
attendance card must be made on the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form.
10.0
Students’ Queries
Any query by a student about the content of examination questions must not
be answered. Students informing an Invigilator of an apparent misprint or
ambiguity must be told to note it in their answer script and in the case of
ambiguity, to state the assumed interpretation. Details of students’ queries
must be entered on the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form.
27 of 52
11.0
Students wishing to leave the Examination Temporarily
11.1
Illness
11.1.1 If a student is taken ill during the examination, an Invigilator must
accompany him or her from the room and arrange for him or her to be
kept under constant supervision.
11.1.2 All of the student’s examination materials must remain in the
Examination Room.
11.1.3 If the student returns to the Examination Room, he or she must not be
allowed extra time in which to complete the examination.
11.1.4 The circumstances of any such illness, including the duration of any
absence from the Examination Room, must be noted on the Senior
Invigilator’s Report Form.
11.2
Other Reasons
11.2.1 A student wishing to leave the Examination Room for any other urgent
reason (e.g. visit to toilet) must be accompanied by an Invigilator. The
invigilator must also indicate in the student’s Answer Book the time the
student left the examination room.
11.2.2 When a student visits the toilet, the extent of supervision is left to the
discretion of the accompanying Invigilator. The Invigilator must ensure,
as far as practicably possible, that the student does not have access to
unauthorised material and does not communicate with any other
person.
12.0
Students Finishing Early
12.1
Students wishing to finish the examination early must obtain permission from
an Invigilator and will not be re-admitted.
12.2
A student completing his or her work before the end of the examination may
be permitted to leave the Examination Room except during the times
stipulated below:
12.3
For an examination with a duration of up to 1½ hours, students are not
permitted to leave during the first 30 minutes or the last 10 minutes.
12.4
For an examination with a duration of 1½ hours or more, students are not
permitted to leave during the first 60 minutes or the last 30 minutes.
All of the student’s examination materials must be collected before the
candidate is allowed to leave the Examination Room and the student must not
be re-admitted.
28 of 52
The TUSC must be checked for any student wishing to leave the Examination
Room early. If the student is unable to produce a TUSC he/she must produce
some alternative form of photographic identification.
13.0
Announcing the Time
The Senior Invigilator must announce the time 30 minutes before the end of
the examination and again when 10 minutes are left. Unless a clock is visible
to all students, the time must be announced every hour.
14.0
Unauthorised Persons
The Senior Invigilator is responsible for ensuring that unauthorised person(s)
are not allowed to enter the Examination Room from the start of the
examination until all students are dismissed.
15.0
Ending the Examination
The Senior Invigilator is responsible for the following:
15.1
Ensuring that the specified duration of the examination is strictly adhered to.
15.2
Instructing students to:

Stop writing their answers.

Remain seated and silent.

Check that they have completed the front covers of all scripts.

Note the number of scripts and used loose sheets on the front cover of the
first script and to ensure that additional scripts and loose sheets are
secured to the first script.
15.3
Collecting scripts and other examination materials. Invigilators must collect at
least one script from each student, even if a student has not done any work,
and must check that the front cover of all scripts have been completed.
15.4
Dismissing the students after the examination materials have been collected.
Students are allowed to keep a copy of the question paper unless there is a
printed statement to the contrary in the question paper rubric. Students may
not remove answer scripts.
16.0
Return of Examination Materials
All scripts, attendance cards, and other examination materials (including the
Senior Invigilator’s Report Form and any Incident Report Form) must be
returned to the Senior Invigilator who is responsible for ensuring their safe
return to the Examinations Office (Room M206b) as soon as possible after the
examination. Any irregularities noted on the Senior Invigilator’s Report Form
29 of 52
must be brought to the attention of the Ombuds Officer, in the Ombuds Office,
by the Head of Learning Environment.
Any TUSC left at the end of the examination must be recorded on the Senior
Invigilator’s Report Form and returned to the Examinations Office (Room
M206b).
30 of 52
APPENDIX 4
INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS UNDERTAKING EXAMINATIONS
By entering the Examination Room, a student agrees to be bound by the
regulations of Teesside University, under the authority of the Senior
Invigilator.
NOTE: Where reference to Examinations Office, Teesside University Student Card
[TUSC], Head of Learning Environment etc. appears below, the equivalent will apply
at collaborative partner institutions and it will be the responsibility of the collaborative
partner to advise the student on the alternative arrangements.
1.0
A student must present himself or herself at the time and place appointed by
the University for the examination of students of his or her group. Failure to do
so, or failure to submit work having so presented himself or herself, will
normally be deemed to constitute failure in that assessment, unless there is
some cause found valid on production of acceptable evidence to the relevant
Mitigating Circumstances Board. Students are not allowed to bring a child or
pet to the Examination Room, nor is a child or pet allowed to be left
unattended outside the Examination Room.
2.0
Students should arrive at the Examination Room at least 15 minutes before
the start of the examination. Students must not enter the Examination Room
until permission is given by the Senior Invigilator, normally not more than 10
minutes before the scheduled start of the examination.
3.0
Students must bring their TUSC (or equivalent) identification to the
Examination Room and this must be shown to the Invigilator, before entering
the Examination Room. Students who do not provide appropriate
identification will not be allowed to enter the room until appropriate
identification is provided and then only in the timescales as cited in
Paragraphs 10.1 and 10.2. Students permitted to enter the Examination
Room must place their TUSC (or equivalent identification in the case of
students studying at collaborative partner institutions) face upwards on the
desk at which they are sitting their examination. This card will be inspected
during the examination.
4.0
Students must not communicate with each other whilst they are in the
Examination Room. Students found to be communicating, looking at another
students work, or using mobile telephones, pagers, mobile devices or any
other similar devices may be classed as a case of Academic Misconduct, and
this matter will be forwarded to the student’s relevant School for
consideration. Students must also behave in a quiet and orderly manner.
Senior Invigilators have the authority to report, or remove, any student from
the Examination Room who is acting in an inappropriate manner. Any
allegations of inappropriate behaviour may lead to disciplinary action in
accordance with the University’s Student Disciplinary Regulations.
31 of 52
5.0
Students are not permitted to use dictionaries unless approval to do so has
been granted by the University’s Variance Sub-Committee and notification
subsequently made to the Senior Invigilator.
6.0
Students should only take into the Examination Room those essential
items needed to complete the examination, and these must be contained
in a transparent pencil case or small transparent plastic bag. Students
must leave all bags, coats and other personal belongings (including mobile
telephones, pagers, mobile devices or any other similar device, which must
be switched off) and all unauthorised material in the part of the Examination
Room specified by the Senior Invigilator. The University does not accept
liability for any losses resulting from this instruction. Students must not
bring valuable items into an Examination Room. All items brought into an
Examination Room by a student are at the sole risk of that student.
Before the examination commences, students must place all essential
equipment on their desk and other items such as calculator cases and
spectacle cases, must be placed (and all similar unauthorised small items) on
the floor under their desks. If unauthorised material is subsequently
discovered not to have been placed in the appropriate area, such material
may be confiscated at the discretion of the Senior Invigilator. Receipts will be
provided by the Senior Invigilator for personal possessions which are
confiscated.
A student having any queries about what material is regarded as being
unauthorised must consult the Senior Invigilator before the examination.
A student found with unauthorised material in his or her possession during the
examination will be reported by the Invigilator. This may be deemed
academic misconduct and be subject to action under the Regulations relating
to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and Programmes).
In examinations with durations that necessitate a break during which time
bags, books, notes, etc. must be left in the Examination Room, the University
will make reasonable efforts to ensure that such possessions remain secure
but the exclusion of the liability for valuable items referred to above will apply
to such possessions. Furthermore, the University’s liability for loss or damage
to a student’s possessions will be limited solely to a proven loss of items
necessary for the examination.
7.0
Smoking, eating and alcoholic beverages are forbidden in the
Examination Room, unless prior arrangements have been made in relation to
the medical needs of a student. Students may bring a small bottle of water in
a clear container.
8.0
Each student must complete an attendance card and the front cover of any
answer scripts before he/she commences the examination.
9.0
Students will be informed by the Senior Invigilator of any specific instructions
and when they may commence the examination.
32 of 52
10.0
Any student arriving late will be admitted providing they arrive no later than
the times stipulated for the relevant examination duration:
10.1
For an examination with a duration of up to 1½ hours, students can be
admitted during the first 30 minutes.
10.2
For an examination with a duration of more than 1½ hours, students can be
admitted during the first 60 minutes.
Unless explicitly provided for by the appropriate Assessment Board, late
students will not be allowed extra time. Any student arriving more than 30
minutes late must give the reason for lateness to the Senior Invigilator.
11.0
Students must read all instructions carefully. Any queries about the contents
of examination questions will not be answered. A student having any such
query must note it in his or her answer script and, in the case of an apparently
ambiguous question, must state the interpretation assumed in his or her
answer.
12.0
Students must not leave their seats without permission from an Invigilator.
Any student wishing to attract the attention of an Invigilator must raise his or
her hand.
13.0
Extra paper for rough work will not be provided. All work must be done in the
supplied answer scripts and any rough work crossed out. Students must
ensure that all work is written in a legible manner.
14.0
Students wishing to leave the Examination Room because of illness or
wanting to visit the toilet must be accompanied by an Invigilator. Invigilators
will indicate in the student’s Answer Book the time the student left the
Examination.
15.0
Students should ensure that they do not consider leaving the Examination
Room until they are sure they have completed. Students who have
completed their work before the end of the examination will usually be allowed
to leave the examination, except during the times stipulated below:

For an examination with a duration of 1½ hours or more, students are
not permitted to leave during the first 30 minutes or the last 10 minutes.

For an examination with a duration of more than 1½ hours, students
are not permitted to leave during the first 60 minutes or the last 30
minutes.
Students wishing to leave the examination must obtain permission from an
Invigilator and will not be re-admitted.
16.0
The Senior Invigilator will formally announce the end of the examination at
which time students must stop writing their answers. Students must remain
33 of 52
seated and silent until dismissed by the Senior Invigilator. Students will not
be dismissed until all answer books, scripts etc., have been collected.
17.0
The Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and
Programmes) define academic misconduct in examination situations as
engaging in any action with the intent of gaining an unfair advantage over
other students taking the same examination. This will include:
17.1
Communicating with or copying from any other students during an
examination except where regulations specifically allow such communication.
17.2
Communicating during an examination with any person other than an
authorised member of staff.
17.3
Taking any written, printed materials or electronically stored information into
the Examination Room, unless expressly permitted by the examination or
programme regulations that have been notified to the Senior Invigilator.
17.4
Gaining access to unauthorised material relating to the examination during or
before the examination.
17.5
Obtaining a copy of an ‘unseen’ examination question paper in advance of the
date and time authorised for its release.
17.6
Personation: The legal term for impersonating another person with the
intention to deceive or gain unfair advantage.
18.0
Any student suspected of contravening these regulations will be reported to
the Ombuds Officer and dealt with in accordance with the Regulations relating
to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and Programmes). The
student(s) involved will be informed by the Senior Invigilator, at the time of the
alleged contravention that this is going to happen.
19.0
During an examination, the interpretation of these Regulations is at the
discretion of the Senior Invigilator. A student dissatisfied with any such
interpretation must send a letter to the Ombuds Officer, in the Ombuds Office,
within 2 working days after the examination.
20.0
If following or prior to an examination the student feels his/her performance
may have or may be affected by any mitigating circumstances he/she must
complete a Mitigating Circumstances Form, which is available from the School
Office.
34 of 52
APPENDIX 5
EXCEPTIONAL CASES PROCEDURE
1.0
Background
The Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and
Programmes) are written with reference to the majority of cases that are
suspected. However there are, from time-to-time, cases which do not easily
fit within the process defined in these regulations, but nevertheless need to be
dealt with insofar as this is possible. In addition, practice continues to evolve
and no set of regulations can ever be entirely future-proof, although it has
been attempted to come as close to that as possible.
An example of an exceptional case, is when the marker reasonably believes
that the submitted assessment is not a student’s own work (for example, so
inconsistent with previous performance as to suggest that it has not been
produced by the student concerned) but the sources from which the work
might have been derived cannot be located. This may be because the
student has plagiarised the work from another or purchased/commissioned a
piece of work.
This Exceptional Cases Procedure must be initiated in full consultation with
the relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee.
As part of the information given to students about academic misconduct, they
must be informed of this Exceptional Cases Procedure and advised that it is in
their interests to retain materials used in developing a submission, such as
would indicate its development and the work done in its preparation.
2.0
Process
All alleged exceptional cases will be classed as academic cheating and dealt
with via the School Academic Misconduct Stage 2 process. The Stage 2
Hearing will normally include a viva, which is a question and answer session
to establish that the work in question is indeed the student’s own work. The
viva will be conducted by the relevant member of staff with the expertise in the
subject area. Students may bring a Friend with them to the Stage 2 Hearing
but the friend will not be allowed to speak on the student’s behalf during the
viva.
Normally a member of the will be in attendance at the Stage 2 Hearing (see
Appendix 8).
3.0
Other Matters
Students must be advised that it is in their interest to retain written or other
materials that can be used to evidence the development by them of the piece
of work as submitted and to assist them in the viva referred to in section 2.0
above.
35 of 52
APPENDIX 6
RECOMMENDED GUIDANCE FOR THE PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF AN
INFORMAL STAGE ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT MEETING
The purpose of the Informal Stage Meeting is to decide whether academic
misconduct has taken place and if so, apply the recommended penalty.
Schools may choose to make use of the role of Academic Conduct Coordinator
[ACC] and Deputy Academic Conduct Coordinator [DACC] to process allegations at
the Informal Stage or they may allow this responsibility to be exercised by the
Module Tutor in full consultation with the relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or
nominee. The term ‘designated member of staff’ is used below to cover both
possibilities.
Prior to commencing the Informal Stage, the designated member of staff must
arrange to check SITS to verify whether there has already been a proven case(s) of
academic misconduct to determine the stage of procedure to be followed.
Collaborative Partners will conduct the Informal Stage at their own institution but
must first consult with the relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee and
together decide on the type of offence and which stage of the procedure is to be
followed.
The Informal Stage deals with first alleged cases of academic negligence. It is
intended primarily as an educational/warning route and, although penalties may be
imposed, they will be of a relatively minor nature.
The following guidance is provided in the event the Informal Stage is appropriate:
1.0
The designated member of staff must arrange to check SITS to verify whether
there has already been a proven case(s) of academic misconduct.
2.0
The designated member of staff must consult with their School
Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee prior to commencing the Informal Stage.
3.0
The designated member of staff must contact the student concerned with the
alleged academic negligence to explain their suspicions and request an
informal meeting to discuss. The student must be advised of the range of
services available from The Link, based in the Students’ Union and Student
Services Department. The Informal Stage Meeting will normally involve the
student and the member of staff only.
NOTE: Staff are not required to formally write to the student or give 5 working
days notice of the Informal Stage Meeting. The meeting will be arranged on
an informal basis at a mutually convenient date and time to both.
4.0
At the Informal Stage Meeting, the designated member of staff will explain to
the student the reason for suspecting academic negligence, the precise
nature of the problems and the possible outcomes of the discussions. The
36 of 52
subsequent conversation must then establish whether or not the student
agrees that there has been academic negligence. The student must explicitly
be asked if they have any explanation of why this has happened.
4.1
If it becomes apparent that there is no firm basis for the allegation of
academic negligence, or the student has provided an adequate explanation,
then the discussion must be stopped.
4.2
If the student agrees that there are grounds for alleging academic negligence,
the member of staff must:

Offer the student advice and guidance on how to avoid academic
misconduct and suspicion of academic misconduct which may include
referring the student to the Learning Hub.
and

Advise the student regarding the marking of the work (penalty 1 – see
Appendix 2).
and

4.3
Complete the Informal Stage Record Proforma, ensuring that both parties
sign the Record and then provide a copy to the student advising that the
occurrence of academic misconduct will be recorded on SITS and also
advise that any future allegation of academic misconduct, at any future
point of their studies if upheld, will lead to more severe sanctions.
If the student does not accept the allegation but the designated member of
staff considers it to be well founded, then the member of staff must:

Advise the student regarding the marking of the work (penalty 1 – see
Appendix 2).
and

Complete the Informal Stage Record Proforma, ensuring that both parties
sign the Record and then provide a copy to the student advising that the
occurrence of academic misconduct will be recorded on SITS and also
advise that any future allegation of academic misconduct, at any future
point of their studies if upheld, will lead to more severe sanctions.
and

4.4
Inform the student in writing that they can proceed to Stage 1 (see
Appendix 7) by writing to the member of staff within 5 working days of the
Informal Stage meeting stating that they wish to proceed to Stage 1.
In the event that a student fails to attend an Informal Stage Meeting without
reasonable explanation or fails to communicate with the School/collaborative
37 of 52
partner in any way, the designated member of staff will make a decision,
based on the evidence available, as to whether academic misconduct has
occurred. The student will be informed of this decision in writing, together with
the penalty, normally within 5 working days of the date the meeting would
have taken place. If the student disagrees with the decision, they can
proceed to Stage 1 (see Appendix 7) by writing to the designated member of
staff within 5 working days of being notified of the outcome of the Informal
Stage Meeting.
4.5
If, during the course of the Informal Stage Meeting, it becomes apparent to the
designated member of staff that the nature of the allegation is such that it
must be dealt with at either Stage 1 or Stage 2, then the member of staff will
halt the Informal Stage Meeting and refer the case to either Stage 1 or 2 as
appropriate, advising the student of this.
Staff should also be aware that Standard Administrative Procedures [SAPs]
are available to support this process. SAPs are lodged with the School Senior
Administrator and staff are advised to consult with the School Senior
Administrator before commencing this process.
38 of 52
APPENDIX 7
FORMAT FOR THE PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF A SCHOOL ACADEMIC
MISCONDUCT STAGE 1 MEETING
NOTE: In this appendix, the academic misconduct Stage 1 process and meeting is
referred to as either the Stage 1 or Stage 1 Meeting.
The purpose of the Stage 1 Meeting is to decide whether academic misconduct
has occurred and if so, award a penalty and report such to the Module
Assessment Board.
Prior to commencing Stage 1, the member of staff suspecting the academic
misconduct must first arrange to check SITS to ascertain whether there has already
been a proven case of academic misconduct at Stage 1 or Stage 2. If so, this may
affect the decision on the penalty (see Appendix 2) and thereafter consult with their
relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee to determine the type of offence
and which stage is to be undertaken.
Stage 1 will normally be applied for any cases progressed from the Informal Stage
and first case of alleged academic malpractice.
Collaborative partners will conduct the Stage 1 Meeting at their own institution but
must first consult with the relevant School Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee and
together decide on the type of offence and which stage of these Regulations is to be
followed.
The following format outlines the sequence of events which must be followed once a
decision has been taken that a Stage 1 Meeting is necessary.
1.0
Advising the Student
The School/collaborative partner hosting the module in which the student is
suspected of academic misconduct will arrange for a Stage 1 Meeting to be
convened and will formally notify the student concerned, giving a minimum of
5 working days notice prior to the Stage 1 Meeting. The correspondence
must include:
1.1
The full details of the nature of the alleged academic malpractice. Copies of
all relevant documentary material or other evidence of the alleged academic
malpractice, unless the nature of the documentation does not allow this, then
the correspondence must explain the process for viewing the material in situ
prior to the Stage 1 Meeting. The viewing process is explained in section 4.0
of the main body of these regulations.
1.2
The date, time and venue of the Stage 1 Meeting.
1.3
The range of services available from The Link based in the Students’ Union
and/or Student Services Department.
39 of 52
1.4
Their right to be accompanied at the Stage 1 Meeting by a friend, who is
entitled to speak or act on their behalf and may be a representative from the
Students’ Union.
1.5
A copy of the current Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught
Components and Programmes).
1.6
The constitution of the Stage 1 Meeting Panel.
1.7
Notification that the Stage 1 Meeting will proceed in their absence should they
fail to provide reasonable explanation or fail to communicate with the
School/collaborative partner in any way.
1.8
Advise the student that they will receive a copy of the completed Stage 1
Meeting Record within 5 working days of the Stage 1 Meeting.
1.9
If more than one student is involved, and the Chair of the Stage 1 Meeting
wishes to interview all students involved together, the students must be
informed of the Chair’s request and informed that they must respond prior to
the commencement of the meeting, confirming their consent (or not). If the
students do not consent to be interviewed together, they will be interviewed
separately.
2.0
Constitution of Academic Misconduct Stage 1 Meeting
The Stage 1 Panel will normally consist of two members:
3.0

A neutral Module Leader from the School hosting the module in which
the student is suspected of academic misconduct, who will chair the
meeting.

The member of staff who suspects the academic misconduct or the
School Academic Conduct Coordinator or Deputy Academic Conduct
Coordinator. (NOTE, If the Deputy Academic Conduct Coordinator
represents the School at the Stage 1 Meeting, then the Academic
Conduct Coordinator may chair the Stage 2 Hearing instead of the
School Deputy/Assistant Dean.)
Academic Misconduct Stage 1 Meeting
The procedure to be followed is:
3.1
Chair to confirm that the procedure being followed is Stage 1 of the
Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and
Programmes). The process for the Stage 1 Meeting must be outlined, and the
student must be informed that a record of the meeting will be made on a
Stage 1 Meeting Record Proforma, which will be forwarded to them within 5
working days of the Meeting.
40 of 52
3.2
Those present at the Stage 1 Meeting must be introduced and an explanation
given for their attendance.
3.3
The precise nature of the alleged academic misconduct by the student must
be stated.
3.4
The case against the student must be outlined by the presentation of
evidence that has been collected.
3.5
The student and/or friend must be allowed to respond to the allegation and
make any relevant statements.
3.6
If at any time evidence is brought forward which needs further investigation,
the Stage 1 Meeting must be adjourned and a time and date agreed for it to
be reconvened.
3.7
A period for general discussion must be allowed, during which both sides can
ask questions and provide explanations of points which have been raised. In
addition to the Chair, other members may also ask questions as they see fit.
3.8
The main points concerning the alleged academic misconduct and the
statements provided by both sides must be summarised to ensure that
nothing has been overlooked by either side.
3.9
After hearing the evidence the student and friend will be asked to leave the
Stage 1 Meeting and the panel members will consider all the points raised,
any reason given by the student to explain their conduct and any actions
previously taken in similar cases.
3.10
The panel will decide whether there is clear strong and cogent evidence of
academic misconduct and if so, the nature and extent of the academic
misconduct. Decisions regarding the penalties to be imposed must take full
account of all the evidence available to the Stage 1 Meeting.
3.11 When a decision has been reached the student and friend will be invited back
into the Stage 1 Meeting and informed of the findings of the Stage 1 Meeting
as regards upholding or dismissing the allegation and if the former, as regards
any penalty. The student must be provided with an opportunity to seek
clarification.
3.12 Students found guilty at Stage 1, but who do not agree with the decision, may
choose to proceed to Stage 2 (see Appendix 8). If this is the case, this
decision will be recorded on the Stage 1 Meeting Record and sent to the
student within 5 working days of the Stage 1 Meeting and a Stage 2 Hearing
will be organised.
3.13
If it becomes apparent that there is no firm basis for the allegation of
academic misconduct, or the student has provided an adequate explanation
such that the allegation can be withdrawn, then the proceedings must be
stopped and the case dismissed. The student will be informed in writing via
41 of 52
the Stage 1 Meeting Record, within 5 working days, noting that the
grade/mark, without penalty, will be reported to the Module Assessment Board
and if appropriate the student will be provided with advice on how to obtain
support and guidance on avoiding academic misconduct in the future. No
record will be recorded on SITS.
4.0
Failure by Student to attend Stage 1 Meeting
In the event that a student fails to attend the Stage 1 Meeting without
reasonable explanation or fails to communicate with the School/collaborative
partner in any way, the Stage 1 Meeting will proceed in their absence. The
student will be informed of the recommendation of the Stage 1 Meeting via the
Stage 1 Meeting Record which must be sent to them normally within 5
working days of the meeting.
5.0
Post Academic Misconduct Stage 1 Meeting
5.1
The student will normally, within 5 working days of the Stage 1 Meeting, be
posted a copy of the Record of the Stage 1 Meeting’s findings as to whether
or not there has been an infraction of the Regulations relating to Academic
Misconduct (Taught Components and Programmes) and if so, its nature and
extent, together with any decision regarding any penalty to be imposed. This
must be reported to the following:





Student concerned.
Relevant member(s) of staff alleging academic misconduct.
Academic Conduct Coordinator/Deputy Academic Conduct Coordinator or
School Deputy/Assistant Dean of the School hosting the module in which
the student is suspected of academic misconduct.
School Senior Administrator.
Chair of relevant Module Assessment Board (only if student found guilty).
5.2
The student must be advised in the correspondence that they can proceed to
the School Academic Misconduct Stage 2 process (see Appendix 8).
5.3
Copies of all correspondence sent to the student in proven cases and any
documents signed by the student must be lodged in the student’s file and a
record maintained on SITS. Failure by a student to Sign their Stage 1
Meeting Record will not invalidate the decision of the Stage 1 Panel.
5.4
In cases where academic misconduct is not found, then no record will be kept
on the student’s file or recorded on SITS. However, anonymous statistical
data on unproven cases will be kept for the purposes of adhering to current
guidance from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education [QAA] and
learning and teaching research purposes only.
Staff should also be aware that Standard Administrative Procedures [SAPs]
are available to support this process. SAPs are lodged with the School Senior
Administrator and staff are advised to consult with the School Senior
Administrator before commencing this process.
42 of 52
APPENDIX 8
FORMAT FOR THE PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF A SCHOOL ACADEMIC
MISCONDUCT STAGE 2 HEARING
The purpose of the Stage 2 Hearing is to decide whether academic misconduct
has occurred and if so, recommend a penalty to the Module Assessment
Board.
Prior to commencing Stage 2, the member of staff suspecting the academic
misconduct must arrange to check SITS to ascertain whether there has already been
a proven case of academic misconduct. If so, this may affect the decision on the
penalty (see Appendix 2). They must then consult with the relevant School
Deputy/Assistant Dean or nominee and determine the type of offence.
NOTE: In this Appendix, the Academic Misconduct Stage 2 process and Hearing is
hereafter referred to as either the Stage 2 or Stage 2 Hearing.
Stage 2 will normally be applied for all 2nd and subsequent offences of academic
malpractice, all academic cheating offences, exceptional cases and academic
misconduct in examinations, even though this may be a first offence. (See Appendix
2 for further details.)
The following format outlines the sequence of events which must be followed once a
decision has been taken that a Stage 2 Hearing is necessary.
1.0
Advising the Student
The School in which the student is enrolled when they are suspected of
academic misconduct will arrange for a Stage 2 Hearing to be convened and
formally notify the student concerned, giving a minimum of 5 working days
notice of the Stage 2 Hearing. The correspondence must include:
1.1
The full details of the nature of the alleged academic misconduct. Copies of
all relevant documentary material or other evidence of the alleged academic
misconduct, unless the nature of the documentation does not allow this, then
the correspondence must explain the process for viewing the material in situ
prior to the Stage 2 Hearing. The viewing process is explained in section 4.0
of the main body of these regulations.
1.2
The date, time and venue of the Stage 2 Hearing.
1.3
The range of services available from The Link based in the Students’ Union
and/or Student Services Department.
1.4
Their right to be accompanied at the Stage 2 Hearing by a friend, who is
entitled to speak or act on their behalf and who may be a representative from
the Students’ Union.
43 of 52
1.5
A copy of the current Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught
Components and Programmes).
1.6
The constitution of the Stage 2 Hearing Panel.
1.7
Notification that the Stage 2 Hearing will proceed in their absence should they
fail to provide reasonable explanation or fail to communicate with the School
in any way.
1.8
The student must be informed that they will receive correspondence advising
them of the outcome of the Stage 2 Hearing normally within 5 working days of
the Hearing.
1.9
If more than one student is involved, and the Chair of the Stage 2 Hearing
wishes to interview all students involved together, the students must be
informed of the Chair’s request and informed that they must respond prior to
the commencement of the Hearing, confirming their consent (or not). If the
students do not consent to be interviewed together, they will be interviewed
separately.
1.10 The Student must be advised that they will be given the opportunity during the
Stage 2 Hearing to advise the Panel of any mitigating circumstances they
wish the panel to be aware of.
2.0
Advising Staff
The School will inform the Stage 2 Hearing Panel members and other relevant
staff in writing within 5 working days of the Stage 2 Hearing. The
correspondence will include:

The date, time and venue of the Stage 2 Hearing.

The constitution of the Stage 2 Panel.
The correspondence to the member of staff alleging the academic misconduct
must indicate that they are allowed to be accompanied at the Stage 2 Hearing
by a friend, who is entitled to speak or act on their behalf.
3.0
Constitution of Stage 2 Hearing
The Stage 2 Hearing will normally consist of three members:

If the School has appointed an Academic Conduct Coordinator or
Deputy Academic Conduct Coordinator, they will act as Chair at the
Stage 2 Hearing unless they acted as Chair at the Stage 1 Meeting.
Otherwise, the appropriate School Deputy/Assistant Dean or other
senior member of the School will act as Chair.

A second senior member of the School (normally the Programme
Director or equivalent).
44 of 52

A senior independent member of the School or University, not hitherto
involved in the case.

In Exceptional Cases (see Appendix 5), a representative from the
Department of Quality and Governance will normally be in attendance.
See also section 5.0 in the main body of these regulations relating to
the University’s right to conduct a Viva in Exceptional Cases.
The Chair of the Stage 2 Hearing must decide, prior to the event, who will act
as secretary and record the events of the Hearing.
4.0
Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing
4.1
The attendees of the Stage 2 Hearing will normally be the panel as in section
3.0 above, the student accompanied by a friend and the member of staff
alleging the academic misconduct who may also be accompanied by a
friend.
4.2
The Chair will confirm that the procedure being followed is the Stage 2 of the
Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct (Taught Components and
Programmes). The process for the Hearing must be outlined, and the student
must be informed that a formal record of the Hearing will be taken and
correspondence confirming the recommended outcome of the Stage 2
Hearing will be forwarded to them within 5 working days and that the penalty
will be confirmed by a Module Assessment Board.
4.3
Those present at the Stage 2 Hearing must be introduced and an explanation
given for their attendance.
4.4
The precise nature of the alleged academic misconduct by the student must
be stated.
4.5
The case against the student must be outlined by the presentation of
evidence that has been collected.
4.6
The student and friend must be allowed to respond to the allegation and
make any relevant statements.
4.7
If at any time evidence is brought forward which needs further investigation,
the Stage 2 Hearing must be adjourned and a time and date agreed for it to
be reconvened.
4.8
A period for general discussion must be allowed, during which both sides can
ask questions and provide explanations of points which have been raised. In
addition to the Chair, other members of the panel may also ask questions as
they see fit. The student and/or his/her friend will be entitled to ask questions
of the member of staff alleging academic misconduct and the member of staff
and/or their friend will be entitled to ask questions of the student.
45 of 52
4.9
The Student must be allowed to advise the Stage 2 Hearing Panel of any
mitigating circumstances they feel should be taken into consideration. If,
after consideration, the Stage 2 Hearing panel decide that the mitigating
circumstances are legitimate and relevant to the case, this will only affect the
decision on the penalty to be awarded and not the decision as to whether
academic misconduct has occurred. Where additional evidence is required to
support the mitigating circumstances this should be requested and ratification
of the decision referred until the evidence is received. Students must also be
advised that any mitigating circumstances considered at the Stage 2 Hearing
will only apply to the assessment that is the subject of the allegation.
4.10
The main points concerning the alleged academic misconduct and the
statements provided by both sides must be summarised to ensure that
nothing has been overlooked by either side.
4.11
After hearing the evidence, the non panel members, with the exception of the
Officers, will leave the Hearing and the Stage 2 Hearing Panel will consider all
the points raised and any reason given by the student to explain their conduct.
The panel members will decide whether there is clear, strong and cogent
evidence of academic misconduct and if so, the nature and extent of the
academic misconduct. Decisions regarding the penalties to be
recommended must take full account of all the evidence available to the Stage
2 Hearing.
4.12 When a conclusion has been reached, the non panel members will be invited
back into the Stage 2 Hearing and informed of the outcome. The student must
be provided with an opportunity to seek clarification if they wish.
4.13 Students found guilty at Stage 2 will be informed at the conclusion of the
Stage 2 Hearing of the decision as to whether academic misconduct has
occurred and the penalty that will be recommended to the relevant Module
Assessment Board. If a student does not accept this decision, under
extenuating circumstances they may enter the Review Stage process if their
case satisfies the relevant criteria. (See section 1.2 of Appendix 9 for criteria.)
4.14
If it becomes apparent that there is no firm basis for the allegation of
academic misconduct, or the student has provided an adequate explanation
such that the allegation can be withdrawn, then the proceedings must be
stopped and the case dismissed. The student will be informed in writing,
normally within 5 working days, noting that the grade/mark, without penalty,
will be reported to the Module Assessment Board and if appropriate be
provided with advice on how to obtain support and guidance on avoiding
academic misconduct in the future. No record will be kept on SITS.
5.0
Failure by Student to attend Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing
In the event that a student fails to attend the Stage 2 Hearing without
reasonable explanation or fails to communicate with the School in any way,
the Stage 2 Hearing will proceed in their absence and the students will be
46 of 52
informed by correspondence normally within 5 working days of the outcome of
the Stage 2 Hearing.
6.0
Post Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing
6.1
The student will normally, within 5 working days of the Stage 2 Hearing, be
sent correspondence advising of the decision as to whether academic
misconduct has occurred. If the student has been found guilty of academic
misconduct he/she must be advised of the penalty being recommended to the
relevant Module Assessment Board and advised that the Chair of the Module
Assessment Board will in due course notify the student whether that
recommendation has been accepted. Following the Assessment Board, the
Chair of the Board will ensure that specific reference to the decision of the
Board, in relation to the imposed penalty, is communicated to the student.
6.2
The student must be advised that they can submit a request for a review of
the decision as to whether academic misconduct has occurred if the relevant
conditions apply (see Appendix 9).
The correspondence should be sent to the following:
 Student concerned.
 Relevant member(s) of staff alleging academic misconduct.
 Academic Conduct Coordinator/Deputy Academic Conduct
Coordinator or School Deputy/Assistant Dean.
 School Senior Administrator.
 Collaborative partner if appropriate.
 Chair of the relevant Module Assessment Board (only if student
found guilty).
6.3
Copies of all correspondence sent to the student in proven cases and any
documents signed by the student must be lodged in the student’s file.
6.4
In cases where academic misconduct is not found, then no record will be kept
on SITS or the student’s file. However, anonymous statistical data on
unproven cases will be kept for the purposes of adhering to current guidance
from the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education [QAA] and learning
and teaching research purposes only. One complete set of papers will be
filed separately by the School and referred to only in the event that a
subsequent action requiring a judgement to be made about the conduct of the
case, for example, a request for a review by the student, necessitates
reference to this material. These papers will be kept for a period of four
months from the date of the Stage 2 Hearing and thereafter destroyed by the
School.
Staff should also be aware that Standard Administrative Procedures (SAPs)
are available to support this process. SAPs are lodged with the School Senior
Administrator and staff are advised to consult with the School Senior
Administrator before commencing this process.
47 of 52
APPENDIX 9
FORMAT FOR THE PREPARATION AND CONDUCT OF A UNIVERSITY ACADEMIC
MISCONDUCT REVIEW PANEL HEARING
This is a formal Review, at the request of a student, of a decision made by a School
Academic Misconduct Stage 2 Hearing that academic misconduct has occurred. A
student cannot request a review of a penalty recommended by a Stage 2 Hearing.
In extenuating circumstances, a student may make written representation within 15
working days of the Stage 2 Hearing, requesting the University Academic
Misconduct Review Panel to consider the decision of the Stage 2 Hearing of whether
academic misconduct has taken place.
1.0
Application Process
1.1
Written applications in the first instance must be made to the Chair of the
Review Panel, Deputy Vice Chancellor (Partnerships & Standards)
[DVC(L&SE)] via the Ombuds Officer in the Ombuds Office. Only in
extenuating circumstances will late applications be considered and in any
event no later than 3 months from the date of the Stage 2 Hearing. Non
agreed late applications will normally be rejected as ‘out of time’. If a student
submits a late submission they must enclose, with their application, a written
explanation for their late submission. The decision of whether to accept a late
application will be at the discretion of the Chair of the Review Panel.
1.2
The Chair or nominee of the Review Panel, once they have received the
minutes and evidence from the Chair of the Stage 2 Hearing, will decide
whether there is justification as cited below.
Applications can only be made on the following grounds:

That the decision reached by the Stage 2 Hearing as to whether
academic misconduct has occurred was wholly inconsistent and/or
unsupported by evidence.
and/or

That there was a material and/or procedural irregularity by the Stage 2
Hearing which has prejudiced the student’s case.
and/or

Additional evidence has come to light since the decision of the Stage 2
Hearing, which could not have been expected to have been produced
at the time of the consideration of the case.
Students may not challenge academic judgement.
1.3
Alternatively, the following procedure applies if it appears to the Ombuds
Officer that the student's application is incomplete, misconceived or out of
time.
48 of 52
The Ombuds Officer will liaise with the Chair or nominee of the Review Panel
to agree that the application is misconceived, incomplete or is out of time and
that the student has failed to show why it was not reasonably practicable for
him/her to submit the application in time. In such cases, the Chair or nominee
shall have the power to dismiss the application, in which event the provisions
of section 6.0 of this Appendix shall apply as if the full Review Panel had met
and had dismissed the application. Alternatively if the Chair or nominee, after
considering the representation from the School, believes that the student’s
case is well founded they may request the School reconvene a Stage 2
Hearing in accordance with section 7.4.
The decision of the Chair or nominee of the Review Panel as to whether or
not to reconvene the Stage 2 Hearing is not subject to further internal appeal
and concludes the academic misconduct process within Teesside University.
2.0
Constitution of the Academic Misconduct Review Panel
2.1
The Review Panel will normally consist of the following three members:

The Chair shall be the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Partnerships & Standards)
or nominee.

School Academic Conduct Coordinator, Deputy Academic Conduct
Coordinator or Deputy/Assistant Dean from a School other than which the
student is/has been enrolled and who has not previously been involved in
the case.

One representative of the Students' Union (not previously involved in the
case).
2.2
The Review Panel may choose to conduct business if one member is unable
to be present for any reason. However, a representative of the Students’
Union must always be present for business to be conducted.
2.3
A secretary will also attend to take formal minutes of the proceedings along
with an Officer who will act as Clerk to the Review Panel and provide advice
and guidance on the regulations.
2.4
Meetings of the Review Panel will be held as soon as it proves possible to
convene a meeting of members.
3.0
Informing the Student
3.1
The administrative processes and timescales may depend on where the
student is living when required to attend the University regarding a review of
an academic misconduct decision. The University will endeavour to make
reasonable adjustments, in conjunction with the Students’ Union, to ensure
that the process is fair to all parties.
49 of 52
3.2
The Ombuds Officer will arrange for a University Academic Misconduct
Review Panel to be convened and formally notify the student concerned no
later than 5 working days prior to the Review Panel Hearing. The
correspondence must include:
3.2.1 The date, time and venue of the Review Panel Hearing.
3.2.2. Their right to be accompanied by a friend, who is entitled to speak or
act on their behalf.
3.2.3 A copy of the current Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct
(Taught Components and Programmes).
3.2.4 The constitution of the Review Panel.
3.2.5 Notification that the Review Panel Hearing will proceed in their
absence should they fail to provide reasonable explanation for their
non attendance.
4.0
Advising the Chair of the Stage 2 Hearing
4.1
The Ombuds Officer will inform the Chair of the Stage 2 Panel Hearing in
writing giving a minimum of 5 working days prior to the Review Panel Hearing.
The correspondence will include:
4.1.1 The date, time and venue of the Review Panel Hearing.
4.1.2 Their right to be accompanied by a friend, who is entitled to speak or
act on their behalf.
4.1.3 A copy of the current Regulations relating to Academic Misconduct
(Taught Components and Programmes).
4.1.4 The constitution of the Review Panel.
5.0
Procedure for the University Academic Misconduct Review Panel
Hearing
5.1
It will not normally be possible for the date of the Review Panel Hearing to be
changed, and this will only be done in respect of extenuating circumstances,
for example medical treatment. Holiday arrangements do not normally
constitute a valid reason. Any requests for a change in the date of a Review
Panel Hearing must be submitted in writing to the Ombuds Officer, and the
decision to change agreed arrangements will be taken by the Chair. Where a
decision to re-arrange a Review Panel Hearing has been refused the student
will be informed, in writing of the refusal, and the case will considered in the
absence of the student.
5.2
In considering the application, the Review Panel may call any relevant
persons to give evidence. If it is expected that attendance of a member of
50 of 52
staff may be required by the Panel, 5 working days notice of the meeting
should normally be given and the member of staff may be accompanied to the
meeting by a friend. The Review Panel Chair will provide the member of staff
with the appropriate documentation.
5.3
The presentation of any new documentation, on the day of the Review Panel
Hearing, will only be accepted in extenuating circumstances with agreement
of the Chair of the Review Panel. This may result in a suspension of
proceedings to provide all parties with the opportunity to consider the new
documentation.
5.4
Information given in writing to the Ombuds Officer, prior to the Review Panel
Hearing, will be communicated to the Review Panel. Information given orally
to the Secretary may not be communicated to the Review Panel.
5.5
All participants will be expected to behave in an orderly and nonconfrontational manner. If the Chair deems it necessary they may adjourn
proceedings if, in their opinion, progress of the Review Panel Hearing is being
impeded.
5.6
During the Review Panel Hearing:
5.6.1 The Chair will outline the procedure of the Review Panel Hearing to all
parties.
5.6.2 The Chair will ask the student and/or friend to present their case in
support of their appeal.
5.6.3 Members of the Review Panel may ask questions of the student and/or
their friend.
5.6.4 The Chair will ask the student and/or their friend to leave the meeting.
5.6.5 The Chair will ask the School representative(s) to present their case.
5.6.6 Members of the Review Panel may ask questions of the School
representative(s).
5.6.7 The Chair will ask the School representative(s) to leave the meeting.
5.6.8 The Panel will consider the evidence in private and reach a decision in
accordance with section 6.0 of this Appendix.
5.7
The deliberations of the Review Panel and any documents produced before it
are confidential to it, but such documents will be circulated to the Chair of the
relevant reconvened Stage 2 Hearing, if sections 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 in this
Appendix apply.
51 of 52
5.8
The Review Panel has the authority to adjourn the Review Panel Hearing if it
requires further information or evidence as it deems appropriate to assist in
making its decision.
6.0
Academic Misconduct Review Panel Decision
After consideration of the available evidence relating to an application, the
Review Panel may:
6.1
Reject the application;
or
6.2
Refer the application, and all relevant documentation available to the Review
Panel, to the Panel of the relevant Stage 2 Hearing, inviting reconsideration of
the earlier decision in the light of the information now available.
or
6.3
Refer the application, and all relevant documentation available to the Review
Panel, to the Panel of the relevant Stage 2 Hearing, directing the Stage 2
Hearing Panel to assess implications and act on any consequences, within
the regulations.
or
6.4
Refer the application, and all relevant documentation available to the Review
Panel, to the Panel of the relevant Stage 2 Hearing directing rectification of
specified matters, assessment of implications and action on any
consequences, within the regulations.
The Review Panel shall keep a record of its proceedings. The decision shall
be circulated to the student, the School/collaborative partner and also, when
appropriate, to any Academic Board Standing Committee with overall
responsibility for assessment matters, so that any issues of principle or
general interest may be identified and acted upon. The record shall also be
available to the Academic Board in extenuating circumstances.
7.0
Procedure following the Decision of the Academic Misconduct Review
Panel Hearing
7.1
The student and the Chair of the Stage 2 Hearing will be informed by the
Ombuds Office, in writing, of the decision of the Review Panel normally within
5 working days of the Review Panel Hearing.
7.2
Where an application is not upheld, the decision of the Review Panel shall be
effective immediately.
7.3
Where an application is not upheld, the student shall be issued normally
within 5 working days of the Review Panel Hearing, with a ‘Letter of
52 of 52
Completion’ of internal proceedings in the manner prescribed by the Office of
the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education [OIA]. A student who is of
the opinion that their case is unresolved may apply to the OIA for
reconsideration of their case under the rules of its scheme within three
months of the issue of the ‘Letter of Completion’. Information of the process
may be obtained directly from the OIA at http://www.oiahe.org.uk.
7.4
When it is decided that a case shall be referred back to the School:
7.4.1 The Ombuds Officer will advise the student that some delay is
inevitable before a final decision is reached.
7.4.2 The Ombuds Officer will inform the student how their case will be
presented to the reconvened Stage 2 Hearing.
7.4.3 All papers considered by the Review Panel will be forwarded to the
Chair of the reconvened Stage 2 Hearing (together with the relevant
record of the Review Panel) unless, in extenuating circumstances, the
Chair of the Review Panel Hearing directs that it would be appropriate
to withhold some of the documentation or agrees with a request by the
student to withhold sensitive personal information.
The independent person from the School or University and the Chair of
the re-convened Stage 2 Hearing must not have had any previous
involvement in the case.
7.4.4 Where an application is referred back to a reconvened Stage 2
Hearing, that Panel’s ultimate decision shall be final.
7.4.5 The reconvened Stage 2 Hearing shall meet as promptly as possible to
consider a reference back and make a decision on whether academic
misconduct has occurred. The Chair of the reconvened Stage 2
Hearing is responsible for communicating the outcome to the student
and to the Ombuds Officer in writing, normally within 5 working days of
the Stage 2 Hearing, but there is no requirement to advise the student
of the reasons leading to the decision reached.
In the event that the reconvened Stage 2 Hearing considers it
appropriate to revise the penalty originally imposed, the Stage 2
Hearing will make such a recommendation to the relevant Module
Assessment Board. The student will be informed of the outcome
following the decision of the Module Assessment Board
Staff should also be aware that Standard Administrative Procedures (SAPs)
are available to support this process. SAPs are lodged with the School Senior
Administrator and staff are advised to consult with the School Senior
Administrator before commencing this process.
53 of 52