1. Definition

1.1 Assessmentmisconduct is defined as all practices that enable a learner to obtain an
        unfair assessment advantage over other learners

1.2 Such practices include, but not exclusively, plagiarism, cheating, collusion and other
        forms of unacceptable assessment misconduct relating to LSC assessed work

1.3 The policy does not cover outside public examinations where the Awarding Bodies own
        policy and procedures will apply

1.4 LSC considers its related policies to be:

Ø  The Assessment Policy

Ø  The Assessment Appeals Policy

Ø  The Equal Opportunities and Diversity Policy

      

  1. Rationale

LSC is seeking to maintain the integrity of its assessment procedures and to give any
learners affected a fair opportunity to respond to any allegation of assessment
misconduct

 

  1. Core principles

3.1 Plagiarism, cheating, collusion and attempting to obtain an unfair academic advantage
        are unacceptable and not allowed

3.2 These forms of assessment misconduct will be subject to disciplinary regulations

3.3 Learners should be made aware of LSC’s assessment misconduct policy together with
        possible penalties at the earliest stage of their programme

3.4 Learners should be provided with guidance on the format of formal acknowledgment of
        source material

4. Implementation

4.1 The processes associated with assessment misconduct is co-ordinated by the senior
        manager with responsibility for Quality Assurance and Curriculum who reports directly
        to the Senior Management Team chaired by the Principal

4.2 Implementation of the core principles is at programme team level where initially the
        tutor will investigate instances of suspected assessment misconduct

4.3 The tutor will consult with the Programme Manager when investigating moderate or serious
        cases of assessment misconduct

 

  1. Quality Assurance

5.1 Programme Managers are expected to ensure that all team members, dealing with alleged
        assessment misconduct, adhere to the relevant procedure

5.2 The senior manager with responsibility for Quality assurance and Curriculum will
        support Faculty Managers dealing with cases of assessment misconduct

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assessment Misconduct Procedure

Action to be taken by staff if assessment misconduct is believed to be proven or if it is admitted by the learner

Procedure

Examples of minor cases of assessment misconduct

Possible courses of action in minor cases

The following actions are to be followed for any misconduct :

  1. The tutor should arrange a meeting with the learner to hear his/her comments. The member of staff should determine the level of seriousness and consider the appropriate action as shown
  2. In all cases, a note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file.
  1. Receiving undue help in good faith because instructions have been misunderstood
  2. Copying a couple of sentences or using someone else’s diagrams
  3. Copying small amounts of text from books without direct acknowledgement, but which does not make a significant contribution to the overall work
  4. Downloading from the internet without acknowledgement, using another’s disk or copying work from another’s disk
  5. Using another’s artwork
  6. Failing to acknowledge the source of a small section of an assignment
  7. Infringing the policy when the assessed work does not contribute to final grade.
  1. Discuss the incident with the learner in a tutorial
  2. Warn the learner about future conduct
  3. Return work to be re-done and resubmitted for marking
  4. If this has happened before, refer directly to a second stage interview
  5. Inform the examining body, in line with their procedures
  6. Inform external examiners/verifiers in line with examining body’s procedures

 

 

 

Procedure

Examples of moderate cases of assessment misconduct

Possible courses of action in moderate cases

The following actions are to be followed for any misconduct :

  1. The tutor should arrange a meeting with the learner to hear his/her comments. The member of staff should determine the level of seriousness and consider the appropriate action as shown
  2. In all cases, a note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file.
  1. Copying from books without acknowledgement which has the effect of making a significant contribution to the overall work
  2. Limited plagiarism from professional work (not course books)
  3. Limited copying of other candidates work (hard copy or from a disk), or excessive help within one piece of work
  4. Limited downloading of information from the internet
  5. The use of model answers downloaded from the internet
  6. In the situation where the assessed work contributes to final grade
  7. Repeated minor cases
  1. Reduce the assessment grade in line with awarding body guidelines. Withdraw the right of the learner to resubmit an assessed piece of work in line with awarding body guidelines
  2. Refer the case immediately to a second stage interview (at the discretion of the investigating member of staff) This would be with the Head of programme who will recommend an appropriate sanction
  3. Notify the examining body, in line with their procedures
  4. Inform external verifiers/verifiers in line with examining body’s procedures

 

 

 

 

 

Procedure

Examples of serious cases of assessment misconduct

Possible courses of action in moderate cases

The following actions are to be followed for any misconduct :

  1. The tutor should arrange a meeting with the learner to hear his/her comments. The member of staff should determine the level of seriousness and consider the appropriate action as shown
  2. In all cases, a note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file.
  1. Extensive copying from textbooks in one piece of work or limited copying in two or more pieces of work which makes a significant contribution to the work
  2. Extensive plagiarism of professional work (more than 100 words)
  3. Buying, selling or stealing of work
  4. Repeated evidence of extensive use of information from the internet without acknowledgement
  5. Using model  internet answers
  6. Using past candidate’s work from the previous years
  7. Undue help from outside of centre
  8. Repeated moderate cases
  1. Award zero achievement
  2. Withdraw the right of the learner to resubmit work for assessment
  3. Disqualify the learner from the course
  4. Recommend expulsion of the learner from the college
  5. Inform the examining body in line with their procedures
  6. Inform external verifiers/verifiers in line with their procedures

 

 

 

 

Assessment Misconduct Procedure

Action to be taken by staff if assessment misconduct is not proven or if the misconduct is proven, yet not admitted by the learner

Procedure

The process

Possible Outcomes

1st stage interview in minor cases

A note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file

  1. Interview will be chaired by the Head of Programme and attended by relevant teacher/assessor(s) and learner
  2. Written notice of the nature of interview and allegations should be sent to the student prior to the interview, notifying the individual that he/she can bring a friend or relative along
  3. The incident is discussed with the learner, with the evidence and location(s) in the learner’s work being identified
  4. The learner is questioned to test knowledge of the work
  5. The learner has an opportunity to explain
  6. The tutor listens to each case carefully and make a decision

 

  1. No assessment misconduct has taken place and the work remains assessed as it stands
  2. The student accepts that assessment misconduct has taken place and is allowed to redo and resubmit the work and is awarded the minimum pass mark. A verbal warning is issued
  3. The learner accepts that assessment misconduct has taken place and accepts a reduced mark. A verbal warning is issued
  4. The learner denies assessment misconduct has occurred and a second stage interview is necessary
  5. LSC Informs external examiners, in line with their procedures
  6. LSC Informs external examiners/verifiers in line with examining body’s procedures

 

Procedure

The process

Possible Outcomes

1st stage interview in moderate cases

A note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file

  1. Interview will be chaired by the Head of Programme and attended by relevant teacher/assessor(s) and learner
  2. Written notice of the nature of interview and allegations should be sent to the student prior to the interview, notifying the individual that he/she can bring a friend or relative along
  3. The incident is discussed with the learner, with the evidence and location(s) in the learner’s work being identified
  4. The learner is questioned to test knowledge of the work
  5. The learner has an opportunity to explain
  6. The tutor listens to each case carefully and make a decision

 

  1. No assessment misconduct has taken place and the work remains assessed as it stands
  2. The student accepts that assessment misconduct has taken place and is allowed to redo and resubmit the work and is awarded the minimum pass mark. A verbal warning is issued
  3. The learner accepts that assessment misconduct has taken place and accepts a reduced mark. A verbal warning is issued
  4. The learner denies assessment misconduct has occurred and a second stage interview is necessary
  5. LSC Informs external examiners, in line with their procedures
  6. LSC Informs external examiners/verifiers in line with examining body’s procedures

 

 

 

Procedure

The process

Possible Outcomes

1st stage interview in serious cases

A note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file

 

N.B Prior to the interview, the HOP should complete a written report.

  1. A report made by the HOP who will institute disciplinary procedures. Leaner attends a 1st stage interview chaired by Director of Studies, attended by relevant tutor and learner
  2. Written notice to learner of  nature of interview and allegations should be sent prior to the interview, notifying the individual that he/she can bring a friend or relative along
  3. The incident is discussed with the learner, with the evidence and location(s) in the learner’s work being identified
  4. The learner is questioned to test knowledge of the work
  5. The learner has an opportunity to explain
  6. The tutor listens to each case carefully and make a decision

 

  1. No assessment misconduct has taken place and the work remains assessed as it stands
  2. The student accepts that assessment misconduct has taken place and is referred to a second stage interview with the Director of Studies who would recommend an appropriate sanction.
  3. The learner accepts that assessment misconduct has taken place. A zero grade in the exam/test module is given, or the assessed work in not awarded a grade. Neither a re-sit, nor re-doing and re-presenting coursework is allowed.
  4. The learner denies assessment misconduct has occurred and a second stage interview is required
  5. LSC Informs external examiners, in line with their procedures
  6. LSC Informs external examiners/verifiers in line with examining body’s procedures

 

Assessment Misconduct Procedure

Action to be taken by staff in all cases where a second stage interview is recommended

Procedure

The process

Possible Outcomes

2nd  stage interview

 

A note of the allegation, outcome and action taken should be recorded on the learners file

 

 

  1. Chaired by the Director of Studies and  attended by HOP, relevant tutor and learner
  2. Written notice is sent to the learner stating the allegations,  a summary of the evidence, the time and place and possible outcomes, and  allowing him/her bring a friend or relative along
  3. Copies of any documents which will be relied upon by any of the parties should be disclosed to the learner with the written notice if possible but in any event at least three clear days before the interview.
  4.  A formal record of the interview is made with the assessing teacher presenting the case and allegations of academic misconduct.
  5. The learner has an opportunity to state their case
  6. The Director of Studies or other member of staff ask appropriate questions to the learner to test their knowledge of the work
  7. The Director of Studies and HOP reach a decision
  1. No assessment misconduct has taken place and the work remains assessed as it stands
  2. The tutor’s decision is upheld and the work is assigned a zero mark and the awarding body is informed.
  3. The learner is found in breach of the Code of Conduct and a recommendation for expulsion is made in writing. Neither a re-sit, nor re-doing and re-presenting coursework is allowed.
  4. LSC informs the external examiner in line with their procedures.
  5. LSC Informs the relevant awarding body in line with their procedures

 

 

Need Help? Contact Us Below

*
 

Contact Us

You can contact us at any time on:

Tel: 020 8694 2825
Email: info@lscareer.co.uk

 

Student Support Area