Parent policy: Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy
Procedures number:
Responsible officer: Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Approval authority: Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Approval date: 6 October 2009
Last amended: 6 October 2009
Effective starting date: 18 January 2010
Any procedures replaced
by these procedures:

These procedures must be read in conjunction with the Student Academic Misconduct - Institutional Operating Policy

Contents

Student Academic Misconduct – Procedures
Part A: General advice
1. General advice 
Part B: Core student academic misconduct procedures
2. Provision of information to students on student academic misconduct
3. Detection of alleged student academic misconduct
4. Preliminary assessment of alleged student academic misconduct
5. Investigation of Category 1 alleged student academic misconduct
6. Investigation of Category 2 alleged student academic misconduct
7. Student Academic Misconduct Register
8. Processes for dealing with student academic misconduct in central examinations
9. Processes for dealing with student academic misconduct involving a student enrolled in the University but not in the course where the misconduct occurred
10. Processes for dealing with student academic misconduct involving a person who is not a student at the University
11. Education/remedial action
12. Authority to impose penalties and educational/remedial actions
13. Implementation of Penalties
14. Grievance with a decision
15. Reporting on cases of student academic misconduct 
Appendix 1: List of forms and templates 
Appendix 2: Process Flowchart

Part A: General advice 

1. General advice

1.1 Definitions

In these procedures the following definitions apply:

“Balance of probability” means a standard of proof established by a predominance of evidence that suggests that something was more likely to have occurred than not occurred

“Course” means a specific subject that is studied as a component of an award program

“Course Coordinator” means the staff member with responsibility for the teaching of a course in which student academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred

“Dean” means the Dean of the Faculty or nominee (senior academic or Head of School) responsible for a course in which student academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred; or the Director of Studies, USC International in the case of alleged student academic misconduct in English language studies undertaken with USC International

“Head of School” means the Head of School or an equivalent position within a faculty responsible for the supervision of the Course Co-ordinator in whose course student academic misconduct is alleged to have occurred

“Student” means a person who, at the time that the alleged academic misconduct occurred, was enrolled in a program, Direct Entry English Pathway or a course offered by the University.

1.2 What is student academic misconduct?

1.2.1 Student Academic Misconduct is any departure from student academic integrity as described in the Student Academic Integrity – Governing Policy. It may involve, for example, actions such as the following: plagiarising, falsifying or fabricating data, cheating in an examination; and collusion (encouraging and assisting a student in committing, or in attempting to commit, academic fraud).

1.2.2 Refer to the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy for the full definition.

1.3 Difference between student academic misconduct and other forms of misconduct

1.3.1 These procedures relate to the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy which covers any departure from student academic integrity as described in the Academic Integrity – Governing Policy. For cases of general student misconduct reference should be made to the University’s Student Conduct and Discipline Policy and related procedures. In cases relating to students misconduct in research higher degrees reference should be made to the University’s Research Misconduct Statement.

1.4 Categorisation of student academic misconduct

1.4.1 Reported instances of student academic misconduct are classified by the degree of seriousness of the misconduct: Category 1 and Category 2.

1.4.2 Category 1 instances are confined to:

(a) instances of plagiarism that appear to be a consequence of a student’s lack of knowledge of, or skill in, the conventions of academic writing or arising from carelessness rather than a deliberate act of deception;

(b) instances of collusion, or attempted collusion that appears to be other than a deliberate act of deception.

1.4.3 All other instances of student academic misconduct are regarded as Category 2 instances.

1.5 Confidentiality

1.5.1 All aspects of an investigation of an allegation of student academic misconduct are to be treated with the utmost regard for confidentiality. The student's right to due process and confidentiality in handling the allegation and investigation must be preserved. The disclosure of information to anyone except those who are directly involved in an investigation will be regarded as a serious breach of professional ethics and addressed through applicable University policies.

1.6 Conflict of interest

1.6.1 A staff member dealing with a case of student academic misconduct has a responsibility to assess the case fairly, objectively and consistently. A personal, family or other relationship with a student has the potential to compromise this responsibility by creating a conflict of interest.

1.6.2 In the case of actual or perceived conflict of interest involving the relevant Course Coordinator, the investigation is conducted by their Head of School or equivalent and in the case of a conflict of interest involving the Dean the investigation is conducted by Dean of another faculty.

Part B: Core student academic misconduct procedures 

2. Provision of information to students on student academic misconduct

2.1 The University’s Website will host a Webpage that includes general information about student academic misconduct.

2.2 Course information (Course Outline or course Blackboard site) will contain links to the Academic Integrity – Governing Policy, Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy and related institutional procedures and guidelines.

2.3 A student is required to agree to the conditions identified in an assessment cover sheet declaration (either electronically or paper) when submitting an assessment task. The declaration includes requiring the student to agree that the assessment task being submitted is their own work and the student is familiar with the University’s Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy.

3. Detection of alleged student academic misconduct 

3.1 When a member of staff or a fellow student has reason to suspect academic misconduct, that person must inform the relevant Course Coordinator as soon as practicable, but normally no later than five working days of the information or evidence coming to light. The allegation can be made either verbally or in writing to the Course Coordinator and any supporting evidence must be provided at that time. The Course Coordinator is required to investigate whether there is any evidence to support the suspicion.

3.2 In the case of suspected student academic misconduct in an examination the incidence must be reported immediately to the invigilator or the Course Coordinator.

3.3 Student academic misconduct detected through text matching software

3.3.1 The University has available the SafeAssign text matching tool as part of Blackboard to assist in the identification of possible cases of plagiarism and collusion.

3.3.2 The software provides a percent matching score and report which gives the Course Coordinator an idea of how much of a student’s assignment was identified as being potentially plagiarised. This report itself should be examined thoroughly and the academic judgement of the teaching staff is relied upon to determine whether or not material has been plagiarised.

4. Preliminary assessment of alleged student academic misconduct 

4.1 When academic misconduct is suspected, and there is evidence to support the allegation, the Course Coordinator is required to complete a Student Academic Misconduct Details Form and conduct an investigation. In conducting the investigation the Course Coordinator must act in accordance with Section 9 of the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy.

4.2 As part of the investigation, the Course Coordinator may:

(a) examine any documentation relating to the incident, including any report;

(b) check the information that was provided to students on the assessment item;

(c) analyse the assessment item; and

(d) contact the student or another person to clarify details of the incident.

4.3 Determination that there is no case for the student to answer

4.3.1 To determine if the student has a case to answer, the Course Coordinator should refer to Section 4 of the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy.

4.3.2 Where the Course Coordinator determines that there is no case for the student to answer, no further action is taken. The Course Coordinator sends a signed Student Academic Misconduct Details Form to the relevant Dean’s office to be retained on a confidential file stored in a manner consistent with the University’s Information Privacy - Governing Policy. If the suspected act was identified by a member of the teaching team or fellow student the Course Coordinator should advise them of the outcome.

4.3.4 If the student concerned has been contacted regarding the alleged case the Course Coordinator should also immediately inform the student of this outcome.

4.4 Determination that there is a case for the student to answer

4.4.1 Where it is determined that the student has a case to answer, the Course Coordinator should determine the category of student academic misconduct by reference to Section 1.4. or the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy.

4.4.2 Where the Course Coordinator determines it is a Category 1 case, he/she should check to establish if the student has a record in the Student Academic Misconduct Register (SAMR). The Course Coordinator should put a request in writing to the faculty’s contact person for the Student Academic Misconduct Register. If there is a record, the case is referred to the Dean as a Category 2 case, where there is no record; the Course Coordinator follows the procedures for investigating a Category 1 case (Section 5).

4.4.3 The Course Coordinator may consult with the Head of School or Dean to determine whether the case should be considered as a Category 2 case.

5. Investigation of Category 1 alleged student academic misconduct 

5.1 When on the basis of the evidence collected, the Course Coordinator determines the student has a Category 1 case of academic misconduct to answer; the Course Coordinator must inform the student of the allegation in a timely manner.

5.2 Notification

5.2.1 The Course Coordinator will despatch to the student, within 10 working days of being informed of the allegation, a formal notification to the student in writing of the allegation of academic misconduct. The notification must:

(a) identify the details of the allegation of academic misconduct;

(b) in the case of an on-campus student, advise the student to attend an interview with the Course Coordinator at the time identified in the notice;

(c) advise the student that they may provide a written response to the allegation in addition to attending the interview (the written response must be provided to the Course Coordinator before the commencement of the interview); and

(d) in the case of off-campus students, advise the student that they may provide a written response to the allegation as a substitute for attending the interview (the written response must be provided to the Course Coordinator by the date set for interview).

5.2.2 The written advice to the Student will be accompanied by:

(a) a Web link or copy of the Academic Integrity – Governing Policy, Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy and related institutional procedures and guidelines;

(b) a copy of any documentary evidence used to support the claim of academic misconduct, whether arising from an electronic detection system or otherwise.

5.2.3 The notice must be posted to the student's normal address for correspondence recorded in the University student information system, and a copy sent to their USC email address.

5.2.4 If there is no response to the notification the Course Coordinator is required to make one final reasonable attempt at contacting the student, by telephone, email and/or in writing, using the current contact details on the student administration system, or other available contact details. The Course Coordinator should maintain a record (method, date and time) of their attempts to contact the student.

5.3 Interview

5.3.1 Where the student attends an interview, the purpose of the interview is to review the evidence available, allow the student the opportunity to respond to the allegation, discuss the matter with the student and allow the Course Coordinator to determine whether misconduct has occurred and the appropriate response.

5.3.2 An appropriate sequence of events for this interview is for the Course Coordinator to:

• inform the student(s) of the nature of the alleged misconduct;
• review the evidence;
• review any information provided by the student;
• allow the student(s) amply opportunity to comment on the evidence;
• determine whether student academic misconduct has occurred; and
• discuss the reasons that misconduct occurs, mechanisms for prevention and consequences of future cases of academic misconduct.

5.3.3 During the interview, the Course Coordinator should record brief notes of the meeting on the Student Academic Misconduct Details Form. On conclusion of the interview if both parties are in agreement as to the accuracy of the notes, the Form should be signed by both parties.

5.4 Decision

5.4.1 Where the Course Coordinator is satisfied that in the balance of probability there is sufficient evidence of the student’s guilt of academic misconduct, the Course Coordinator must act in accordance with Section 10 of the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy in determining the educative process or penalty to be applied.

5.5 Notification of outcome

5.5.1 Where appropriate at the conclusion of the interview the Course Coordinator should verbally inform the student of their decision and the nature of the educative process or penalty to be applied in their case.

5.5.2 The Course Coordinator will notify the student in writing of their determination, the notice must:

(a) give the student full details of the Course Coordinator’s determination;

(b) advise that the student may contact the Course Coordinator to discuss the determination; and

(c) advise the student of the available appeal mechanism (Section 9. Student Disciplinary Appeals of the University’s Student Conduct and Discipline Policy).

5.5.3 The notification of outcome must be posted to the student's normal address for correspondence recorded in the University student information system, and a copy sent to their USC email address.

5.6 Record keeping

5.6.1 In the case, that the allegation of student academic misconduct is not proven, the Course Coordinator sends copies of the correspondence and the signed Student Academic Misconduct Details Form to the relevant Dean’s office to be retained on a confidential file stored in a manner consistent with the University’s Information Privacy - Governing Policy. All other information relating to the allegation should be appropriately destroyed.

5.6.2 In the case, that the allegation of student academic misconduct is proven, the Course Coordinator sends copies of the correspondence, Student Academic Misconduct Details Form and all evidence to the relevant Dean’s office to be retained on a confidential file stored in a manner consistent with the University’s Information Privacy - Governing Policy.

5.6.3 The Dean ensures that the details of the incident are entered into the Student Academic Misconduct Register (SAMR).

6. Investigation of Category 2 alleged student academic misconduct 

6.1 In all Category 2 alleged cases of student academic misconduct the Course Coordinator must present a Student Academic Misconduct Details Form on the matter to the Dean detailing the evidence on which the allegation is based. In conducting the investigation the Dean must act in accordance with Section 9 of the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy.

6.2 The Dean, on reviewing the Form and supporting evidence determines that there is no case for the student to answer, no further action is taken. The signed Student Academic Misconduct Details Form should be retained in a confidential file held in the Dean’s office. All other information relating to the allegation should be appropriately destroyed.

6.3 If the suspected act was identified by a member of the teaching team or fellow student the Course Coordinator should informally advise them of their decision.

6.4 If the student concerned has been contacted regarding the alleged case the Dean or the Course Coordinator should also immediately inform the student of this outcome.

6.5 The Dean, on reviewing the form and supporting evidence determines that there is a case for the student to answer; a notice regarding the allegation of student academic misconduct is sent to the student.

6.6 Notification

6.6.1 The Dean will within 10 working days of receipt of the Student Academic Misconduct Details Form formally notify the student in writing of the allegation of academic misconduct. The notice must:

(a) identify the details of the allegation of academic misconduct;

(b) provide an opportunity for the student to attend an interview with the Dean at the time identified in the notice;

(c) advise the student that they may provide a written response to the allegation either as a substitute for attending the interview or in addition to attending the interview (the written response must be provided to the Dean by the date set for interview); and

6.6.2 The notice must be posted to the student's normal address for correspondence recorded in the University student information system, and a copy sent to their USC email address.

6.6.3 The notice must be accompanied by the following documentation:

(a) a Web link or copy of the Academic Integrity – Governing Policy, Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy and related institutional procedures and guidelines;

(b) a copy of any documentary evidence used to support the claim of academic misconduct, whether arising from an electronic detection system or otherwise.

6.6.4 The student may obtain a copy of the Student Academic Misconduct Details Form from the Course Coordinator, upon making request to the Dean.

6.6.5 The time set for the interview and for a written response must be no more than 15 working days, from the date of the notice. In exceptional circumstances only, the Dean may consider a request from the student for an extension of time to provide a written response or attend an interview.

6.6.6 If there is no response to the notification the Dean is required to make one final reasonable attempt at contacting the student, by telephone, email and/or in writing, using the current contact details on the student administration system, or other available contact details.

6.6.7 If there is still no response five working days after this attempt has been made, or the student fails to arrive at the scheduled time and place, the Dean will proceed to make a judgement on the student’s case in the student’s absence.

6.7 Interview

6.7.1 The purpose of the interview is to review the evidence available, discuss the matter with the student and allow the Dean to determine whether misconduct has occurred.

6.7.2 Attendees at the meeting would normally be the Dean; and an appropriate independent member of staff (where applicable); and the student(s) involved; and a support person or observer for the student (if the student chooses). This person must not be legally qualified and may not act as an advocate or make direct comment to the meeting without the permission of the Dean.

6.7.3 It is strongly recommended that an appropriate independent member of staff attend the meeting as an independent observer and confirm any record of interview taken.

6.7.4 An appropriate sequence of events for this meeting is for the Dean to:

• inform the student(s) of the nature of the alleged misconduct;
• review the evidence provided by the Course Coordinator;
• review any information provided by the student;
• allow the student(s) good opportunity to comment on the evidence;
• determine whether student academic misconduct has occurred.

6.7.5 During the interview, the Dean or the independent member of staff should record brief notes of the meeting on the Student Academic Misconduct Details Form. On conclusion of the interview if both parties are in agreement as to the accuracy of the notes, the Form should be signed by both parties.

6.7.6 If student academic misconduct has occurred it will be necessary to determine an appropriate penalty; and if possible at that time, inform the student(s) verbally and in writing of the penalty.

6.8 Determination

6.8.1 On conclusion of the interview, the Dean may seek such further information or advice on the substance of the allegation as is deemed necessary.

6.8.2 If the Dean determines that there is no case for the student to answer, no further action is taken. The signed Student Academic Misconduct Details Form should be retained in a confidential file held in the Dean’s office. All other information relating to the allegation should be appropriately destroyed. The Dean formally advises the relevant Course Coordinator of their decision.

6.8.3 If the Dean is satisfied that in the balance of probability there is sufficient evidence of the student’s guilt of academic misconduct, the Dean must act in accordance with Section 10 of the Student Academic Misconduct – Institutional Operating Policy in determining the educative process and penalty to be applied.

6.8.4 The Dean will formally notify the student in writing of their determination. The notice must:

(a) give the student full details of the Dean’s determination;

(b) advise that the student may contact the Dean to discuss the determination;

(c) advise the student of the available appeal mechanism.

6.8.5 The Determination Notice must be posted to the student's normal address for correspondence recorded in the University student information system, and a copy sent to their USC email address.

6.8.6 If the Dean is seeking a penalty that requires the approval of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, the notification to the student must wait until confirmation has been received from the Deputy Vice Chancellor.

6.9 Record keeping

6.9.1 In the case, that the allegation of student academic misconduct is not proven, copies of the correspondence and the signed Student Academic Misconduct Details Form are to be retained on a confidential file in the Dean’s office, the file should be stored in a manner consistent with the University’s Information Privacy - Governing Policy. All other information relating to the allegation should be appropriately destroyed.

6.9.2 In the case, that the allegation of student academic misconduct is proven, copies of the correspondence, signed Student Academic Misconduct Details Form and all evidence are to be retained on a confidential file in the Dean’s office, the file should be stored in a manner consistent with the University’s Information Privacy - Governing Policy.

6.9.3 The Dean ensures that the details of the incident are entered in the Student Academic Misconduct Register (SAMR).

6.9.4 If the Dean’s determination is the imposition of the penalty of the grade of Withdrawn – Fail (WF) in a course, a copy of the determination must be sent to the Director, Student Administration. The Director, Student Administration arranges for the student’s academic record to be amended accordingly.

7. Student Academic Misconduct Register 

7.1 In order to ensure fair and consistent treatment of students and the effective management of student academic misconduct on an inter-Faculty basis, a Student Academic Misconduct Register (SAMR) which records all formal academic misconduct offences by students, will be created.

7.2 The SAMR is managed within the Office of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, and access to the SAMR will be strictly controlled and restricted by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. The Dean of each faculty nominates a staff member for approval by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, who has responsibility for updating the register on behalf of the faculty and acting as the contact point for enquiries from Course Coordinators.

7.3 The SAMR should support all faculty and be used to record all proven category 1 and 2 cases of student academic misconduct.

7.4 The data collected will include:

• Student’s name and ID
• Student’s Program
• Form of misconduct
• Category of misconduct
• Course(s) in which the misconduct occurred
• Course Coordinator
• Brief description of the case
• Teaching period and year
• The determination - the staff member making determination and date of the determination

7.5 The details of all entries pertaining to individual students will be removed within six months of the graduation of a student.

7.6 All staff are reminded of the highly sensitive nature of information likely to be contained in such a register and the potentially serious ramifications for students in the event of unauthorised or inappropriate disclosure through either inadvertent communication or the failure to take appropriate security measures in relation to the database. Information contained in the SAMR is therefore to be treated in the strictest confidence with privacy considerations paramount.

8. Processes for dealing with student academic misconduct in central examinations 

8.1 In central examinations, it is generally an invigilator who will detect cheating or an attempt to cheat.

8.2 The invigilator may permit the student to complete the examination, provided that further infringing conduct can be prevented or the unauthorised material is removed.

8.3 The invigilator must complete a Student Academic Misconduct Details Form on the incident and provide it to the Director, Student Administration or nominee, immediately after the examination. Any unauthorised material which is confiscated should accompany the Form. Upon receipt of this Form, the Director, Student Administration or nominee, may, as appropriate, contact the Course Coordinator to confirm that unauthorised material is relevant to the course.

8.4 The Director, Student Administration or nominee, must forward the Form and any other pertinent information to the relevant Dean as soon as possible.

8.5 The Dean follows the process identified in Section 6 of these procedures.

9. Processes for dealing with student academic misconduct involving a student enrolled in the University but not in the course where the misconduct occurred 

9.1 When the allegation of academic misconduct involves a student who is not enrolled in the course in which the academic misconduct occurred, the Dean is responsible for undertaking the investigation of the allegation including Category 1 cases.

9.2 If following the investigation the Dean finds the case of academic misconduct proven, the Dean can impose a penalty if the student is currently enrolled in a program offered by the Faculty. If the student is enrolled in a program offered by another Faculty, the Dean is required to make a recommendation on the penalty to the Dean of the Faculty in which the student is enrolled. The Dean of the second Faculty is responsible for sending the Determination Notice to the student.

9.3 In such cases, the full range of penalties identified in the Policy are unavailable as the student is not enrolled in the course in which the academic misconduct was identified. If it is a Category 1 case or a student’s or “first instance of misconduct” then only penalty (a) is available and in the case of a “Repeat Offence” only options (c) and (d) apply.

10. Processes  for dealing with student academic misconduct involving a person who is not a student at the University 

10.1 If the allegation of academic misconduct involves a person who is not enrolled in the University, the Dean is responsible for undertaking the investigation of the allegation including Category 1 cases.

10.2 If the case of academic misconduct is proven, the Dean should complete a report for the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. The DVC will seek appropriate legal advice to determine whether the person should be pursued through the criminal justice system.

11. Education/remedial action 

11.1 The education/ remedial actions required to be undertaken by the students should be relevant to their needs. The Course Coordinator should interview the student to discuss the issues of academic integrity, academic misconduct and how the student can implement strategies to avoid future cases.

11.2 The Course Coordinator may also require the student to:

• attend a session with a University Academic Skills Adviser;
• participate in a tutorial or on-line tutorial in Plagiarism and Referencing offered by the USC Library.

12. Authority to impose penalties and educational/remedial actions 

12.1 The following table identifies staff authorised to impose a penalty and educational/remedial actions on a student found guilty of academic misconduct.

13. Implementation of penalties

13.0.1 If the decision is to impose one of the following penalties, a copy of the Determination Notice should be sent to the Director, Student Administration.

13.1 Imposing a penalty of exclusion

13.1.1 If the Dean’s decision is to impose one of the following penalties:

• the student is immediately excluded from enrolment at the University for up to one calendar year; or
• the student is immediately expelled from the University.

13.1.2 The Dean must make a request in writing to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor for the imposition of either of these penalties.

13.1.3 The Dean should provide a copy of the Student Academic Misconduct Details Form accompanied by a rationale for the imposing of the proposed penalty to the DVC.

14. Grievance with a decision 

14.1 Where a student considers that the decision made on their case of academic misconduct has been unfairly or inappropriately determined, the student may choose either to submit a written request to the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, for a review of their case, stating the grounds for making that request, or lodge a formal written appeal to the Director, Student Services, stating the grounds for the appeal.

14.2 A student who wishes to appeal against the action taken against them by a Course Coordinator, Dean of faculty or Deputy Vice-Chancellor, as the result of an allegation of academic misconduct should refer to “Section 9. Student Disciplinary Appeals” of the University’s Student Conduct and Discipline Policy.

15. Reporting on cases of student academic misconduct 

15.1 Reports to Academic Board

15.1.1 Each Dean of Faculty shall provide an annual summary report to the February meeting of Academic Board on proven cases of student academic misconduct. The report should identify by faculty:

(a) the number of proven cases by the nature of the student academic misconduct (cheating, plagiarism or collusion) and by Category of student academic misconduct; and

(b) the number of cases where a decision was overturned on appeal.

END

Back to top

Appendix 1: List of forms and templates 

• Student Academic Misconduct Details Form
• Assignment Cover Sheet Declaration
• Notice – Alleged case of student academic misconduct
  • Course Coordinator
  • Dean

Appendix 2: Process flowchart

• Process flowchart (PDF 16KB)

Contact Student Services to request an alternative format or an accessible version of the process flowchart.

For PDF documents you must have the free Adobe Acrobat Reader, which can be downloaded from the Adobe Download page.

Back to top