Download - The Regulations on the Use of Unfair Means 17 Mar 08 Tim Burton, University Senior Quality Officer
The Regulations on the Use of Unfair Means17 Mar 08Tim Burton, University Senior Quality Officer
Overview
Purpose of the regulatory framework Definition of unfair means Overlaps with related conduct issues The Caution Procedure Adjudication Panel Hearings Boards of Examiners Appeals
Purpose of the Code
to provide a mechanism for penalising any form of unacceptable academic behaviour by candidates seeking Hull qualifications
a clear statement of how the University (including external examiners) view such conduct
to ensure that allegations are fairly and properly investigated in accordance with legal obligations
Importance for academic standards - comparability for UoH awards
Duty to educate students in good academic practice
What are "unfair means"?
Any conduct which may > "gain an illegitimate advantage or benefit"> "create a disadvantage or loss"
Applies to any UoH candidate on any UoH programme where credit is sought - including collaborative programmes (excl. HYMS)
Whether acting alone or with another whether attempted or completed Only applies to ‘summative assessment’ (reg. 4(d)) Library materials – now outside scope (reg. 1(c))
Examples:> Plagiarism (below) – including self-plagiarism> cheating in examinations (including (i) possession
of prohibited materials (ii) use of prohibited materials)
> falsifying laboratory or other results> conspiring to have work completed by another> collusion> impersonation
Plagiarism
‘plagiarism is a form of fraud’ ‘work which purports to be a candidate's own but
which is taken without acknowledgement from the published or unpublished work of others’ (reg. 5)
‘The primary test of plagiarism is … the presence or absence of quotation marks, and adequate acknowledgement of sources …’
cf: poor academic practice/scholarship Intention is irrelevant - planned amendments
Other forms of misconduct
Professional unsuitability / misconduct> QH:F17> Only applicable to programmes which adhere to the
standards of statutory bodies (e.g. Nursing, Teaching)> Dean, on receipt of an allegation, must determine whether to
proceed under unfair means or prof unsuit (one or other, never both) (UM Reg. 1(d))
> Likely review of penalties to ensure alignment between revised UM regulations and PU/M
Research misconduct> QH:L2> Now applies to any research activity> But makes the regs on Unfair Means applicable for all
allegations relating to students
Responsibilities
The dean – responsibility can be delegated Significant role in ensuring consistency Partner institutions need to identify dean
equivalent and inform UQO The dean or (delegate) cannot be involved in
any Adjudication Panel except to provide evidence to the panel
When an allegation is made I – plagiarism
Regs Part II – determination of whether candidate eligible for caution
Identifying plagiarism Examiner when marking piece of summative assessment
identifies parts of the work as plagiarised, indicate in appropriate manner but not indicate the source(s)
Then decide whether plagiarism ‘minimal’ (NOT defined in the regs)
If minimal – advise the candidate (having removed the anonymity)
If more than minimal must forward to dean with covering statement and supporting evidence (dean then removes anonymity)
If examiner suspects plagiarism but difficult to prove, once anonymity removed advise candidate of ‘concerns’ – no penalty
Eligibility for the caution On receipt of an allegation, the dean must decide whether the
candidate is eligible for a caution Reg. 12 defines the circumstances through which all candidates
get an initial ‘cautionable period’ whenever they commence their studies on a programme leading to a UoH award [diagram]
Candidates can only ever receive one caution unless the second offence was committed before the candidate received the first caution
Issuing a caution The dean must issue using the University’s
approved wording set out in annexe 1 Set a deadline for resubmission of the work –
deadline must be ‘reasonable’ having regard to the mode and location of study and in all cases be no less than five working days
Consequences of a caution being issued Resubmission of the work correctly acknowledging the sources but not
otherwise revising the work Examiner re-examines the work imposing the prescribed penalty –
never more than 40 awarded for the piece of work Module Board will calculate the overall module mark (the mark for the
module as a whole is not capped – this is not a resubmission in the capping sense)
If the module has then been failed normal reassessment rules apply Candidate may refuse to accept the caution and elect a full adjudication
panel hearing (though at risk of higher penalty, as explained in the annexe 1 caution letter)
Part III – Adjudication Panel hearings
Where a caution is inapplicable, because> Candidate not eligible (outside cautionable period or received
previous caution> Candidate refused caution (above)> Allegation relates to unfair means other than plagiarism
Dean makes such further investigation as deems appropriate
If behaviour the result of mental health difficulties – should consult Disability Services
Dean decides whether there is prima facie evidence of a breach of the Code
If no prima facie case, allegation closed; inform candidate in writing
No further action
If yes, candidate informed in writing> summarising the allegation and supporting evidence> explaining the right of the candidate to respond in writing
within 21 days> opportunity to admit or deny the allegation> if admitted, make statement in mitigation or by way of
explanation
On receipt of denial from candidate Dean can close matter if s/he considers allegation’ satisfactorily explained’
Other possible evidence
Evidence of attempts to destroy or make unavailable evidence
Evidence of a previous allegation bearing a ‘striking similarity’ to the present allegation (reg. 22)
Establishing the hearing
Dean responsible for establishing the panel consisting of a trained chair, at least one member of academic staff, a trained secretary
Register of trained chairs being established
if allegation denied, Adjudicating Panel established to determine proof and penalty
if admitted, Adjudicating Panel established to determine penalty
Inform the candidate in writing of the time, date and venue – 7 days notice (leaflet to be revised)
Details of witnesses, copies of witness statements Candidate right to be heard and be accompanied by
person of his/her choosing Supervisor may attend
Conducting the hearing
Dean to present the findings of the investigation Candidate entitled to ask ‘fair and relevant’ questions Chair of panel responsible for ensuring proceedings fair, and
deciding if sufficient evidence presented Trained secretary must minute proceedings Panel makes decision in private – majority decision now
sufficient Proof beyond reasonable doubt (not defined)
> Remember Turnitin does not in itself prove plagiarism
Plagiarism – mitigating circumstances are not relevant to proof unless very exceptional – matter for SPC/RD to decide - adjourn
Penalties
Penalties must be within the framework set out in reg. 25 (taught), 26 (PGTS) or 27 (research degree thesis) subject to:
The general principles in reg. 24> If previous offence (other than caution or simultaneous offence) start
with presumption that the penalty is termination of programme> Relevant factors – e.g. nature and severity of conduct, stage on
programme, statement by way of mitigation Penalty must be applied to the whole module University Warning to be issued by SPC or termination of
programme – record latter on transcript (relevant to future admissions decision)
Special cases – must adjourn and apply to SPC
Notifying the decision
Copies of decision to relevant Module, Programme Board and SPC
Inform candidate in writing of decision and summary of reasons within three working days
Relationship with boards of examiners
Boards must not interfere with the decision of the Adjudication Panel
But must make decisions according to University regulations and can make decisions on grounds unrelated to unfair means
Pending cases must be deferred Module Board
> accepts the mark awarded by the Panel> But an MB can RNP on other grounds
Programme Board> Decides the consequences of the module mark> Decides if candidate eligible for reassessment/referral or
condonement according to regulations> If eligible, but AP denied r/r or c then AP decision is binding> If eligible, but AP decided can be r/r or c Programme Board
can deny if - only if - decision to deny is based on other criteria (e.g. non attendance/submission)
Right of appeal
Right of appeal to the chair of SPC within 14 days of UM decision being served in writing
Appeal on grounds relating to procedure leading to decision, but can challenge the finding of proof and/or the penalty imposed
University Senior tutor will investigate Duties of panel chair to provide information to the Senior Tutor
(note deadlines) If appeal hearing takes place dean and/or chair of panel may be
called Possible role for candidate’s supervisor
Nb: only candidate can challenge decision
Application to collaborative provision
Delegation to PIs to hold panels and issue cautions
Staff development for chairs and secretaries Clarification of appeals Confirmation of role players to UQO and
faculties
Data
The faculty must provide the following as an annexe to the QER (effective Winter 2009, reporting on 07/08)
> The number of cautions issued> The number of allegations rejected without holding an
Adjudication Panel (no prima facie case and satisfactorily explained)
> The number of Adjudication Panels held, divided by plagiarism/other form of unfair means
> The number of allegations upheld/rejected> The number of cases arising from retrospective investigation> The penalties imposed for those allegations upheld
>Data must be presented by department or equivalent unit mode level of study gender, disability and ethnic origin.
Further guidance on unfair means
The codes/procedures> UoH Quality Handbook - www.hull.ac.uk/quality > UQO Faculty-link
Appeals/special cases -> UG/PGT: Derek Ord ([email protected]) > PGR: Nigel Shaw ([email protected])