Code of Student Discipline: Academic Misconduct

ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

The examples of academic misconduct described here are not intended to be exhaustive. Students who are in any doubt about whether their conduct might constitute an offence under the Code should either a) not engage in that activity or b) consult a member of teaching staff for guidance.

Plagiarism is the act of taking another’s ideas and representing them as one’s own. This may involve the use, without proper acknowledgement, of published or unpublished work (including art and digital resources), of work done partly or wholly by another person, of work obtained from an essay bank or a web site, or of recorded material from lectures and tutorials. Plagiarism includes not just the actual copying of text verbatim (which may also be a breach of copyright) or replication of code, or close paraphrasing of text, but also the unacknowledged presentation of ideas from other sources as if they were original to the author or the assembling of pieces of the work of others into a new whole.

Self‐plagiarism is the act of submitting for assessment a piece of work already (or simultaneously) submitted for assessment in the same module, another module or in another context. Self‐plagiarism also includes the submission of work that has substantial overlap with parts of work submitted elsewhere; this could include experimental results, substantive parts of essays or reports etc.

Falsification is the fabrication or alteration of data – for example, by changing data in order to confirm a hypothesis not supported by the actual data, or the invention or fabrication of the results of an experiment, which are then reported as genuine measurements. Included in falsification is the deliberate omission of data where, for example, experimental results or known facts are omitted in order to support an otherwise unsupportable hypothesis. Documentation can also be falsified and this could include for example, fraudulently inserting a signature on someone else’s behalf. In this example, it might also constitute non‐academic misconduct

False citation is the citing of a source for information, when the source does not contain that information or when the information cited was not gleaned from that source.

Academic misconduct in examinations or class tests includes the following prohibited activities:

• Taking any device which can store data or access the intranet, software or materials into an in‐person examination venue (other than those specifically permitted), irrespective of whether or not any use of the item(s) was made.

• Taking information (including notes in any format, books, electronically stored data or illegitimately annotated copies of dictionaries, set texts, annotations made on or concealed on parts of a student’s body, etc.) into an in‐person examination venue (including toilets etc.), except where such items are left in an area designated by an invigilator. This is irrespective of whether or not any use was made of the item(s).

• Providing University staff with incorrect or misleading information related to the examination (prior to, at or after an examination).

• Unauthorised removal of an examination script, papers or blank examination stationery from the examination venue.

• Unauthorized exit from the examination venue during the period of an examination.

• Unauthorised acquisition of examination questions prior to an examination, whether or not the student is a candidate for that examination.

• Failure to follow the rules for an examination (whether in‐person or online), in a way that might result in the gaining of an academic advantage.

Collusion is where students act together in order to deceive or cheat. This could include writing an essay for a student; providing one’s own work that could be submitted by another student for marking (either an entire piece of work or a part); assisting any student in academic misconduct relating to an examination or class test; having a third party take the place of a student, for example in an examination. Note: group‐based coursework involves co‐operation and collaboration to produce the required output so would not generally be considered a form of collusion. However, students should be careful to work within the guidelines laid down for the coursework.

Coercion is where a student puts pressure on another student or member of staff to act in a particular way, or attempts to do so, with the intention of gaining an academic advantage.

Contract cheating is where a student commissions or seeks to commission another party (either paid or unpaid) to perform academic work on their behalf.

Unacceptable use of AI (Artificial Intelligence) is where a student uses an AI tool/s to generate academic work on their behalf and presents AI ideas as their own without appropriate acknowledgement.

Research Misconduct

Postgraduate Research (PGR) students’ work may be the subject of an allegation of academic misconduct and may be dealt with under this Code. PGR students are strongly encouraged to consult the Researchers’ Code of Conduct and to seek advice from the Graduate School.

The standard of proof that will be used in all cases is the balance of probabilities. This means that any Authorised Disciplinary Officer, Academic Student Disciplinary Panel or Disciplinary Appeal Panel is satisfied that it is more likely than not that an alleged offence took place.

PROCEDURE IN CASES OF ALLEGED ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

a. Investigation

Before embarking on any disciplinary action, it is important that the facts are established through a preliminary investigation. Alleged misconduct will initially be investigated by an Authorised Disciplinary Officer (ADO). All suspicions of academic misconduct in a piece of work should be referred to the School’s delegated ADO (see accompanying guidance notes for academic staff).

The ADO will determine:

1. If there is a case to answer;

2. If the student (and other parties) needs to be interviewed as part of the investigation

3. If the matter can be dealt with by an in‐School sanction

4. If it should be referred to a Student Academic Disciplinary Panel.

In judging whether or not there is a reasonable case, the ADO will scrutinise the work in associated with the accusation and, if there is a case to answer, conduct an interview with the student(s) concerned. The ADO will inform the student as soon as possible of the alleged offence or offences and give reasonable notice of the time, date and place at which the student should attend. At the meeting, the student may be accompanied by another member of the University community, i.e. a fellow student, a member of staff or a member of the Students’ Association.

The student will have the opportunity to present evidence and/or make a statement in mitigation as part of the proceedings, if they wish. Failure to attend the meeting will not preclude the ADO from reaching a decision, based on the evidence available. The ADO may also gather evidence from other sources, such as witness statements, and may also conduct interviews with members of staff and/or other students.

If the ADO finds there is no case to answer, no further action is taken. If it is found that there is no case to answer, the allegation can form no part of any future investigation into other allegations of academic misconduct.

If the ADO finds that there is a case to answer, they should contact Academic Services to check if a sanction for academic misconduct has previously been applied to the student. If an in‐School sanction has been previously applied, the ADO will refer the case to a Student Academic Disciplinary Panel.

In‐School sanctions will generally be applied for first instances of plagiarism, self‐plagiarism and false citation for which the following sanctions may be applied¹:

• a bad academic practice warning,

• a grade being awarded for only that part of the unit of assessment which reflects the student’s original work, or

• Grade F awarded for the unit of assessment.

However, the student’s stage of study and discipline area² may result in some first offences being referred direct to the Student Academic Disciplinary Panel. Students who do not engage with the School‐level process may also be referred.

If the case is referred to a Disciplinary Panel, a brief note of previous sanctions applied, and the nature of the misconduct concerned, will be circulated to members of the Panel along with other relevant paperwork.

The process from initial identification to a sanction or referral to a Panel from the School will normally be completed within five working days.

When an in‐person examination irregularity occurs, the student must hand over to the invigilator any unauthorised material/devices and will normally be permitted to continue with the examination. The invigilator will retain confiscated material at the conclusion of the examination and return it to Academic Services with the Examination Report Form.

b. Student Academic Disciplinary Panel

The Student Academic Disciplinary Panel (“Disciplinary Panel”) will normally comprise a Dean of School³ as Chair, another member of academic staff and the Abertay Students’ Association President, or their nominee. The Chair will be from a School other than that in which the student is registered. An Academic Services Officer will administer the Panel, act as Clerk and take a note of its proceedings. Details of the conduct of the Disciplinary Panel are given in Appendix A.

c. Student Academic Disciplinary Panel Sanctions

If the allegation of academic misconduct is a proven, the Panel may impose one or more of the following sanctions, as appropriate (this list is not exhaustive, other sanctions may also be applied in exceptional circumstances):

• A bad academic practice warning.

• A written reprimand or severe reprimand.

• Grade of F awarded for the unit of assessment with an opportunity for reassessment capped at Grade D (if the misconduct occurred at the first attempt).

• Grade of F awarded for the unit of assessment with no opportunity for re‐assessment and a recommendation to the Programme Assessment Board that the student may be permitted to progress and carry the associated module if sufficient credit has been accumulated.

• Grade of F awarded for the module with no opportunity for re‐assessment and a recommendation to the Programme Assessment Board that the student is unable to progress to the next stage and instead is required to re‐enrol to repeat the stage of study if sufficient credit has been accumulated.

• Discontinuation of studies.

The level of penalty or sanction imposed will depend upon the nature of the misconduct and whether it is persistent or particularly severe.

The Disciplinary Panel will communicate its decision to the student in writing normally within five working days of the date of the Disciplinary Panel meeting. The notice confirming the decision will give details of the right of appeal. The decision will also be communicated to the School and to Academic Services, in order to be lodged in the student’s record.

Appendix A ‐ Conduct of Disciplinary Panel meetings

The student will be invited to attend the Disciplinary Panel, although it may proceed in their absence (see below). The student may be accompanied by another member of the University community, i.e. a fellow student, a member of staff or a member of the Students’ Association⁴ for support.

The Chair will begin the meeting with panel members by outlining the procedures to be followed, after which the Chair will invite the Authorised Disciplinary Officer (ADO) to make a statement regarding the decision they reached following their investigation and any School witness(es) present may be asked to give evidence or provide clarifications. The ADO and School witnesses will then be asked to leave.

The Chair will then invite the student into the meeting. The Chair will outline the nature of the allegation(s) against the student and invite the student to state whether they admit or deny the allegations.

The student and/or the student’s representative may at this stage present supporting evidence to the Disciplinary Panel. Evidence may include oral evidence of witnesses or written submissions, including mitigating evidence, which should have been submitted to the Clerk no less than two working days before the meeting.

The Panel will take the opportunity to seek clarification on any points raised.
The student and/or their representative will be invited to address questions by panel members.

The student and/or their representative will be invited to give a concluding statement. This will be the final stage at which new evidence can be submitted.

When all statements have been made, all witnesses heard and all questioning completed, all persons present other than the members of the Disciplinary Panel must leave the meeting. The Clerk will, however, remain with the Disciplinary Panel.

The Disciplinary Panel will consider the evidence and reach a decision, which will be sent to the student in writing normally within five working days. The decision will also be communicated to the School and to Academic Services, in order to be lodged in the student’s record.

Student Representation at Disciplinary Panels

Where a student cannot attend the meeting, they may nominate another person to represent them, but is not required to do so. Where a student elects to nominate another person to represent them at the meeting, written notification of this must be submitted in advance to the Clerk (StudentConduct@abertay.ac.uk). A student may only nominate another member of the University Community (i.e. a fellow student, a member of staff, a member of the Students’ Association Executive or University support worker) as their representative, unless there are exceptional circumstances.

Where a student has not informed the Clerk in advance that they are unable to attend a meeting and/or fail to attend, it will be at the Chair’s discretion whether the meeting proceeds in the student’s absence.

Appendix B - Conduct of Disciplinary Appeal Panel Hearings

The Appeal Panel will meet in private prior to the hearing to agree the issues to be addressed and the details of how the hearing will be conducted.

The appellant should submit any evidence no less than two working days before the hearing. Where an appellant introduces new material at the hearing, it will be at the discretion of the Panel whether to accept the evidence. The Appeal Panel reserves the right to consider any new evidence separately and may suspend or defer the hearing to consider any such submission.

The Appeal Panel may seek the assistance of a suitably qualified person at a hearing where it is considered beneficial. Such persons are not entitled to participate in Appeal Panel decisions but may provide advice to the Appeal Panel at the invitation of the Chair, either during the hearing or when the Panel is sitting in private to discuss the case in advance of the hearing or in reaching its decision following the hearing.

The Appeal Panel will invite a representative of the Academic Disciplinary Panel, normally the Chair, or in the case of an In‐School sanction, the Authorised Disciplinary Officer (ADO), to attend briefly to provide a statement on how the ADO or Panel reached their decision.

The Appeal Panel will take the opportunity to seek clarification on any points raised with the Disciplinary Panel representative/ADO before they leave the hearing.

Witnesses will be called into the hearing individually. The Chair will outline the procedures to be followed by any witness(es) after which any witness(es) will be called in to give evidence. The Appeal Panel will address any questions or clarifications to the witness(es), before leaving the meeting.

The Chair will invite the appellant and/or their representative into the hearing to present their case. As with the Student Disciplinary Panel, above, students may be accompanied by an appropriate supporter or they may nominate a representative to speak on their behalf. Where a student elects to nominate another person to represent them at the meeting, written notification of this must be submitted in advance to the Clerk (StudentConduct@abertay.ac.uk). A student may only nominate another member of the University Community (i.e. a fellow student, a member of staff, a member of the Students’ Association Executive or University support worker) as their representative⁵.

The Appeal Panel will ask questions of the appellant or their representative. The appellant or their representative will have the right to ask questions of any members of the appeal panel at the hearing.

The appellant and/or their representative will be invited to give a concluding statement.
When all statements have been made, all witnesses heard and all questioning completed, all persons present other than the members of the Appeal Panel must leave the room. The Clerk will, however, remain with the Appeal Panel.

The Appeal Panel will consider the evidence and reach a decision, which will be sent to the appellant in writing normally within five working days. The standard of proof to be used is the balance of probabilities. The decision of the Panel will also be communicated to the School and to Student and Academic Services, in order to be lodged in the appellant’s record.

Where the appellant cannot attend the hearing, they may nominate another person to represent them but is not required to do so. Where the appellant elects to nominate another person to represent them at the hearing, written notification of this must be submitted in advance to the Clerk. The appellant may only nominate another member of the University community (i.e. a fellow student, a member of staff or a member of Abertay Students’ Association) as their representative, unless there are exceptional circumstances.

Where the appellant has been given sufficient notice to appear but does not attend, it will be at the Chair’s discretion whether the hearing proceeds in the appellant’s absence. Where the appellant has indicated their intention to appear but is prevented from so doing for reasons outwith their control (for example by a medical emergency or having been taken into Police custody), the Panel will re‐ convene at a later date in order to allow the appellant to attend.

Appendix C ‐ Summary of Process

* The ADO will also report in‐school sanction to the Quality Assurance Manager.
** Following the internal process, students retain the right to seek an independent review of the University’s disciplinary process by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO).

To receive alternative formats of this diagram please get in touch with our Student and Academic Services team.

¹ All in‐school Sanctions will be reported to the Quality Assurance Manager to ensure fair and consistent decision‐making.

² A proven case of academic misconduct will require reporting to the Law Society for those studying for a Law degree and may result in a referral to a Fitness to Practice Committee for students on the Mental Health Nursing programme or MSc Counselling.

³ Including the Dean of the Graduate School and Dean of Teaching and Learning.

⁴ In exceptional cases, the Director of Student and Academic Services has authority to allow students to be represented by an external representative, such as a carer or support worker.

⁵ In exceptional cases, the Director of Student and Academic Services has authority to allow students to be represented by an external representative, such as a carer or support worker.