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. Suspected minor offences shall be dealt with at School level under the procedures set out in 4.

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• plagiarism or duplication in unpublished work submitted for assessment by a postgraduate research student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 ("the Investigating Officer"), who will carry out an investigation and will:

• scrutinise the piece of work and any other documentary evidence provided by either the member of staff or the student
• consult with the member of staff who discovered the alleged offence
• inform the student in writing 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 as well as a copy of any documentary evidence of the case against 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 directly involved in the case previously will also attend to observe. The student should be re-advised/ given guidance about referencing, reporting of results etc.

The member of staff dealing with the case ("the Investigation Officer"), will prepare a report for the Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee). This report will remain on the student's file until they graduate. Where this member of staff considers that the alleged offence may be a major offence, they may recommend that the procedure for dealing with major offences be invoked.  If the alleged offence is collusion or copying/permitting copying, all students involved shall be interviewed.  Students will be informed of the identity of all individuals with whom they are suspected to have colluded.  

The Head of School/Centre Director (or nominee) will consider the investigated 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 there is evidence of poor academic practice but not of an academic offence and signpost the student to advice, guidance and additional learning resources
• find that a minor academic offence has been committed and impose a penalty from the list below
• find that a major academic offence has been committed and 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 (for that attempt) 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 that attempt) 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 for that attempt.  The offer of a resit attempt will be considered in line with relevant study regulations (including programme specific regulations).  If a resit is granted, the resit attempt will be capped at the pass mark, for degree classification purposes. 

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.

Following initial review, and normally within five working days of receiving a report of an alleged major offence, 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 to discuss the alleged major offence. No member of the Panel should have prior knowledge of the case. The student should be given at least 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 should also be informed of their right to submit written submissions and/or supporting documentary evidence to the Panel.
• if the allegation is contract cheating, the student, prior to the Panel meeting,  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 to demonstrate progression. 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 and without further notice.  It is the student's responsibility to establish good cause to the Panel's satisfaction.  

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

The Panel will then forward a written report to the relevant Chair, accompanied by all supporting evidence. The report will summarise the Panel's investigations and set out the findings of the Panel, that either:

i. no offence has been committed with a recommendation that the case be dismissed with no further action to be taken (in which case the student’s mark will stand); or

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

Where the Panel finds that an offence has been committed, the Panel may also recommend that the case be referred for consideration under the Conduct Regulations or the Fitness to Practice Procedure.

The relevant Chair will consider the Panel's 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 extent 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(s) of the Panel; or

ii. dismiss the case where there is evidence of poor academic practice but not of an academic offence and signpost the student to advice, guidance and additional learning resources; or

iii. confirm the finding and the penalty recommended by the Panel; or

iv. confirm the finding and impose a different penalty from the list below; or

v. refer the case for consideration under 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 (for that attempt) 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 that attempt) for a maximum of the pass mark;

iv. Award a mark of zero for the component(s) but not permit the student to re-do it for that attempt.  The offer of a resit attempt will be considered in line with relevant study regulations (including programme specific regulations). If a resit is granted, the resit attempt will be capped at the pass mark, for degree classification purposes; or

v. refer the case to the Academic Offences Committee.

i. a written warning

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

iii. refer the case to the 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 that 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 via email to the Appeals, Conduct and Complaints Team (appeals@qub.ac.uk);