An academic offence is normally considered ‘minor’ if it occurs in a piece of work that contributes one third or less of the assessment for the module.

The following are considered ‘major’ offences:

• if the offence occurs in a piece of work that contributes more than one third of the assessment for the module
• research misconduct
• plagiarism or duplication in unpublished work submitted for assessment by a postgraduate research student
• repeat or multiple offences
• cheating in an examination, class test or laboratory test
• contract cheating.

Allegations of minor offences should be dealt with at School level. The aim is to provide the student with advice and guidance and to prevent repetition of the offence; however, penalties may also be imposed.

The allegation should be reported to the Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee), who will delegate the matter to a member of the relevant Board of Examiners, who will carry out an investigation and will:

• scrutinise the piece of work and any other evidence
• consult with the member of staff who discovered the alleged offence
• inform the student of the allegation/s against them, identifying the module (or assessment) concerned.   A copy of the Procedures and the Student Guidance should be sent to the student. If relevant, the student should also be provided with a copy of the Turnitin report.
• invite the student for interview, giving them at least five working days’ notice of the meeting (the notice time may be shortened if timescales are tight) and advising them of their right to be accompanied.
• interview the student. Another member of academic staff from the School who has not been involved in the case previously will also attend. The student should be given guidance about referencing etc.

The member of staff dealing with the case will prepare a report for the Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee). Where this member of staff considers that the alleged offence may be a major offence, they may recommend that it be dealt with as a major offence. If the alleged offence is collusion or copying/permitting copying, all students involved shall be interviewed.

The Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee) will consider the case and make a decision. The Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee) may:

• find that no offence has been committed and dismiss the case
• find that an offence has been committed and impose a penalty from the list below
• refer the case to the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners for consideration as a major offence

i. A written warning;

ii. Declare the relevant work submitted as null and void and permit the student to re-do the component with no further penalty (i.e. the full mark obtained is allowed to stand);

iii. Declare the relevant work submitted as null and void and permit the student to re-do the component for a maximum of the pass mark; or

iv. Award a mark of zero for the component but not permit the student to re-do it.

The decision should be communicated to the student in writing normally within eight working days of the decision being made. The letter should set out the allegations against the student and the decision relating to each allegation, giving reasons for the decision.

The outcome letter should signpost the student to their right to appeal (on grounds) within ten working days of receipt of this letter. The outcome letter should also signpost the student to the Appeal to the Academic Offences Committee Form and should highlight the support available from Advice SU and the Student Wellbeing Service.

Please note that there is no right of appeal against the decision to refer a case to the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners.

The Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee) shall report the case to the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners or School Postgraduate Research Committee (SPRC) (relevant Chair) as appropriate.

Within five working days the relevant Chair will:

• arrange a School Panel consisting of at least two members of the Board of Examiners/SPRC and one representative from outside the School to investigate the case and meet with the student/s. No member of the Panel should have prior knowledge of the case. The student should be given five working days’ notice of the meeting and advised of their right to be accompanied (the notice time may be shortened if timescales are tight). The student may also submit written submissions and/or documentary evidence to the Panel.
• if the allegation is contract cheating, the student may be required to undergo a short viva voce with a member of academic staff with knowledge of the subject area and to submit drafts of their work. The member of staff will prepare a report for the Panel and the report will be shared with the student before the meeting.
• inform the student of the nature of the alleged offence, including the module (or assessment) concerned and provide a copy of the Procedures for Dealing with Academic Offences and a copy of any documentary evidence of the case against the student.

The student is required to attend the meeting. If they fail to do so without good cause, the Panel may consider the student’s case in their absence.

The Panel may examine evidence or witnesses and conduct other enquiries as it deems necessary. Witnesses may be examined and cross-examined by the parties.

The Panel will then forward a written report to the relevant Chair, accompanied by all relevant evidence. The report will set out the findings of the Panel:

i. no offence has been committed and the case has been dismissed with no further action (in which case the student’s mark will stand).

ii. an offence has been committed and the Panel recommends a penalty.

The Panel may also recommend that the case be referred to the Director of Education and Student Services to consider invoking the Conduct Regulations or the Fitness to Practise Procedure.

The relevant Chair will consider the report and may consult with other relevant members of the Board of Examiners or SPRC. The Chair will take into account:

i. the extent of the academic offence

ii. the degree of intent

iii. the student’s level of study and previous educational background

iv. any previous academic offences by the student

v. the extend of the student’s knowledge or understanding of the concept of academic misconduct, referencing procedures etc

vi. the impact of the penalty on the students’ progress or award.

The relevant Chair may:

i. dismiss the case, notwithstanding the finding and recommendation of the Panel

ii. confirm the finding and the penalty recommended by the Panel

iii. confirm the finding and impose a different penalty from the list below

iv. refer the case to and Academic Offences Committee

v. refer the case to the Director of Education and Student Services to consider invoking the Conduct Regulations or the Fitness to Practise Procedure.

The decision should be communicated to the student in writing normally within eight working days of the decision being made. The letter should set out the allegations against the student and the decision relating to each allegation, giving reasons for the decision.

The student has the right to appeal the decision of the relevant Chair to an Academic Offences Committee, although there is no appeal against the decision to refer a case to an Academic Offences Committee or to refer the case to the Director of Education and Student Services. The outcome letter should signpost the student to their right to appeal (on grounds) within ten working days of receipt of this letter. The outcome letter should also signpost the student to the Appeal to the Academic Offences Committee Form and should highlight the support available from Advice SU and the Student Wellbeing Service.

i. a written warning

ii. Declare the relevant work submitted as null and void and permit the student to re-do the component with no further penalty (i.e. the full mark obtained is allowed to stand).

iii. Declare the relevant work submitted as null and void and permit the student to re-do the component for a maximum of the pass mark;

iv. Award a mark of zero for the component(s) but do not permit the student to re-do it; or

v. refer the case to an Academic Offences Committee.

i. a written warning

ii. direct that the offending material be removed from the work and that the student carry out the work necessary to replace it

iii. refer the case to an Academic Offences Committee.

The relevant Chair (or nominee) will be invited to attend the meeting of the Academic Offences Committee to explain their decision. See section 6 of the Procedures for Dealing with Academic Offences for further information.

All information submitted by the School will be shared with the members of the Academic Offences Committee and/or Academic Offences Appeals Committee, the student and their representative.  The School should ensure that all other students’ names and personal information are redacted and the information complies with the University guidance on data protection.

It should also be noted that most information supplied could be requested at a later date as part of a Subject Access Request under Data Protection or a response to a complaint to the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman (NIPSO); therefore, Schools are advised to forward all relevant information as part of the response to an appeal.

If you have any questions about any aspect of the process please contact a member of staff from Academic Affairs:

• Procedures for Dealing with Academic Offences
• Guidance for Students
• Students' Union Advice Centre
• Student Wellbeing Service