1389/2011

These procedures are to be read in conjunction with the Policy: Code of Practice for Student Academic Integrity

PROCESS FOR DETERMINING AND THEN RESPONDING TO APPARENT POOR ACADEMIC PRACTICE OR ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

STAGE 1. Where a Course Authority thinks that a student's academic behaviour may raise concerns under the Code of Practice they must meet with the student to discuss the matter.  The purpose of the meeting is for the Course Authority to decide:

• First, whether there are in fact any concerns under the Code of Practice and,
• If there are concerns, whether it is an instance of poor academic practice or of academic misconduct. 

This meeting must occur as soon as possible after the matter has been identified.  The student must be informed, at the time the meeting is arranged, about the purpose of the meeting and the nature of the Course Authority's concerns.  The student should be offered the option of being accompanied at the meeting by another person (other than a legal representative).

If the student requests it, a copy of the assessment item that has been marked up to indicate the points of possible concern should be made available to the student prior to the meeting.

STAGE 2. After speaking with the student, and having considered the assessment item in question, the Course Authority will decide whether there are any concerns under the Code of Practice. 

• If no concerns under the Code are raised, the student will be informed of this in writing and told that the matter is concluded.  Where a student is fully exonerated, a clear and concise statement of the reasons why this has occurred should be entered on the student's University file.

• If concerns under the Code are raised, the Course Authority must assess (then decide) whether it is an instance of:

(i)  poor academic practice, or

(ii) academic misconduct. 

In making this assessment, the Course Authority should take into account the following factors:

• the student's explanation of what has occurred, and the student's response to concerns raised by the Course Authority, including redemptive behaviour (such as contrition, remorse, apologies);
• the extent of problematic material relative to the total amount of material in the submitted work;
• whether the conduct is inadvertent or accidental;
• the circumstances in which the academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred, including the student's personal circumstances at the time;
• whether the student has received general instruction, in this or other courses, about appropriate standards of academic research and writing practice;
• whether the student has previously been specifically counselled about the need to adhere to the principle of appropriate scholarly practice or has been found to be in breach of the Code;
• the stage of studies that the student has reached (it can be expected that later year students should have a greater awareness of the principles and expectations embodied in the Code than students at the early stages of their academic studies).

NOTE:  The following processes are described in the attached flowchart.

STAGE 3. Conduct which constitutes poor academic practice under Stage 2.(i)

If the student's conduct is determined by the Course Authority to constitute poor academic practice, the Course Authority:

• Will consider it as a pedagogical issue (thereby recognising that student needs explicit teaching in scholarly practice).

• Will counsel the student about appropriate academic practices to ensure future compliance with the Code.
• May reduce the mark for the item of assessment, or require the student to undertake a further or alternative form of assessment.
• Will advise the student that any future conduct that constitutes plagiarism or other behaviour covered by the Code may result in the application of academic penalties or disciplinary consequences.

STAGE 4. Notification of poor academic practice

Stages 1. and 2.(i) to 4 do not constitute a finding of academic misconduct.  The processes for notification of poor academic practice are:

• The Course Authority will give to the Delegated Authority (normally the Associate Dean (Education) or Head of School) a note that the student has been counselled about appropriate scholarly practice and has been made aware of the consequences of any future deviations from those standards.
• The Delegated Authority will cause to have the note from the Course Authority entered on the student's University file.
• The student will be informed in writing that the note from the Course Authority has been entered on the student's University file. 

The notation on the student's file does not constitute a record of academic misconduct.  It is intended only as a means of recording when a student has been the subject of the educative and non-disciplinary process described in Stages 1. and 2.(i) to 4.

STAGE 5. Conduct which may constitute academic misconduct under Stage 2.(ii)

If, under Stage 2., the Course Authority is of the opinion that the student may have engaged in academic misconduct the Course Authority will:

• Inform the student in writing of this opinion, and
• Speak to the Delegated Authority about the matter and provide copies of any material that was considered at Stage 2.

The Delegated Authority will examine the material, taking into account the factors listed at Stage 2., to determine:

(i)   Whether the matter may constitute an instance of academic misconduct (in which case the process described in Stages 6., 7. and 8. will apply), or

(ii)  Whether the matter is more appropriately classified as poor academic practice (in which case the process described in Stages 3. and 4. above will apply).

STAGE 6. Process for dealing with a determination under Stage 5.(i)

If the Delegated Authority determines that the matter may constitute an instance of academic misconduct:

• The student will be advised in writing of this determination and asked to meet with the Delegated Authority and the Course Authority to discuss the matter. 
• The student should be offered the option of being accompanied at the meeting by another person (other than a legal representative). 
• If the student chooses not to meet to discuss the matter, the student will be given the opportunity to make written representations.

STAGE 7. Decisions available to the Delegated Authority

The Delegated Authority, in consultation with the Course Authority, taking all factors into account including the meeting with the student or any written representations will decide either:

(i)   That the student has engaged in academic misconduct.  In particular, a finding of academic misconduct will be appropriate where:

.     there is evidence that the student's conduct was knowing, intentional, reckless, wilful, premeditated, repeated or is otherwise inexcusable;

.     there are no compelling or adequate mitigating circumstances to explain the conduct;

.     the student's explanation is inconsistent with other compelling evidence (eg the student denies copying even though the assessment item contains material that is clearly copied from another identified source); or

(ii)  That the student's conduct constitutes poor academic practice (in which case the process described in Stages 3. and 4. above will apply); or

(iii) That the student's conduct has been found not to be in breach of academic integrity under the Code.  The student will be informed in writing of this and told that the matter is concluded.  Where a student is fully exonerated, a clear and concise statement of the reasons why this has occurred should be entered on the student's University file.

STAGE 8. Consequences of a finding of academic misconduct under Stage 7.(i)

The consequences of a finding of academic misconduct are:

• A punitive penalty will be applied (i.e. it is open to the Delegated Authority to determine the punitive mark reduction penalty.  The assessment item may receive a mark of 0%).

The Delegated Authority will report the misconduct to the Prescribed Authority (i.e. normally the ANU College Dean or the Registrar) for the application of the University's Discipline Rules..

• A record that the student has committed a breach of the Code, including details of the breach, will be entered on the student's University file.

The student will be informed in writing of the finding of academic misconduct and of these consequences.

STAGE 9.  APPEALS

Where an academic penalty applied at Stage 3. or Stage 8. results in a final grade of fail for the course, the review and appeal processes set out in the Procedure:   Assessment Review and Appeals and the Assessment Rules (Examinations Rules) must be followed.

Where an academic penalty is applied at Stage 3. or at Stage 8., i.e. the mark for the item of assessment is reduced, and the student believes they have grounds for an appeal, the student may appeal in writing to the Education Dean against the mark reduction.  The grounds on which a student may appeal are:

• 1. severe illness or medical condition (documentary evidence of which must be lodged with the appeal);
• 2. harshness of the penalty;
• 3. special circumstances set out in the appeal;
• 4. proper processes have not been followed.

The Education Dean will determine the processes for the consideration of the appeal and notifying the student of the outcome.  The decision of the Education Dean is final.

521bstudacintegrityfinaljun09_flow_chart.doc (77.5 KB)

introduced 12 December 2003 (367g/2003); revised November 2005 (paper 34a/2006); revised and renamed June 2009 (521b/2009).