Student discipline – academic malpractice

This page contains links to University guidance documents, including information for staff on dealing with suspected cases of plagiarism. It also provides links to other useful internal and external information, including School training modules for students on good academic practice and avoidance of plagiarism.

Guidance and resources

The Division of Teaching and Learning Delivery (TLD) has web pages containing links to relevant guidance documents and links to other useful internal and external sources relating to academic malpractice. The page includes resources for staff in Schools as well as resources Schools can refer students to:

TLD Academic Malpractice Information

The University of Manchester Resources

Resources for students:

Resources for staff:

Contract cheating resources

This toolkit for staff aims to raise awareness about contract cheating as a form of academic malpractice, and offer ways in which to combat it:

Contract Cheating Toolkit
Contract Cheating: A quick guide for staff (including detection tips and how to substantiate claims)

Collusion resources

Several staff and student authored resources are available on the topic of Collusion. The aim is to support discussion with students in class or in group advising sessions:

Artificial Intelligence Guidance

A number of guidance documents for staff and students can be found at the following page:

Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidance

Detection

Faculty of Humanities Guidance on Interpreting Turnitin Originality Reports

Assessing cases

Dealing with a case of suspected academic malpractice by an undergraduate or postgraduate taught student always starts at the School level, and may be referred to Faculty and/or University level depending on the student's level of study and record of previous offences.

All suspected cases of academic malpractice should be marked up by an academic member of staff or tutor to show the location and extent of relevant passages, and their possible original sources or other indicators of academic malpractice, and referred in the first instance to a designated academic member of staff in the School (School Academic Malpractice Officer).

The School Academic Malpractice Officer will assess whether or not the evidence suggests that academic malpractice may have been committed.

If the School Officer judges that the case does not constitute academic malpractice but rather poor academic practice, the matter will be referred back to the tutor or supervisor responsible for the piece of work in question, with appropriate advice as to how to proceed [e.g. advice may include – poor referencing = poor piece of work, mark accordingly, etc.]. In such instances, it is essential that the student is given appropriate feedback and guidance.

If it is judged that academic malpractice may have been committed the case should be handled as follows:

Full information found in paragraph 5.3 of the Academic Malpractice Procedure.

Case Types	Dealt with by
UG programmes levels 4, 5 and CPD – first offence PGT programmes taught element – first offence	School-based SDP
UG programmes levels 4, 5 and CPD – second offences UG level 6 and above – first offence PGT programmes taught element – second offence PGT dissertation element – first offence PGR taught element – first offence	Faculty-based SDP
All UG or PGT programmes – first and second offences of examination malpractice in examinations administered by the Division of Student and Academic Services	Campus Life-based SDP
UG programmes levels 4, 5 and CPD – third (or further) offences UG programmes level 6 and above – second (or further) offences PGT programmes taught element – third (or further) offences PGT programmes dissertation element – any subsequent offence PGR taught element – subsequent offence PGR progression assessment, thesis or viva – first offence Any student – a significant offence	UDP
Misconduct in research by a student at any level of study under criteria 3.3	Head of Research Governance, Ethics and Integrity

Referring cases to the Faculty

Cases referred to the Faculty should include the following:

Student Discipline Referral Form
Marked up copy of the assignment showing the alleged academic malpractice
Major original source material marked up (underlined) and cross-referenced to the assignment
Copy of the Turnitin originality report (where available)
Copy of the letter sent to the student informing them of the referral to the Faculty
Mark grid/breakdown of marks for each component of the assessment for the course unit(s) in contention
*For allegations of Contract Cheating / Collusion, Schools should include a report which details the student’s initial response to the allegation. Details of how to proceed with this can be found in paragraph 4.4 of the Academic Malpractice Procedure.

Student Disciplinary Panels (Faculty Level)

In order to ensure that alleged cases of academic malpractice heard at Faculty level are handled expeditiously, a number of academic staff act as the Chairs of Faculty level Academic Malpractice Panels. The staff have attended an induction session, chaired by the Associate Dean (Teaching, Learning & Students) prior to acting in this capacity.

Faculty Professional Services staff, from the Teaching & Learning Team, act as the administrative officer (in accordance with the Regulation) and attend the Panel hearings to record the outcome.

Role of panel members at Faculty malpractice hearings (the Panel)

Panel members should have knowledge of the potential effect on the student’s academic progress/final degree result of any proposed penalty.

Panel members are expected to:

Ensure familiarity with case documentation before the Panel hearing
Understand and be able to advise the Panel on the effect any proposed penalty imposed would have on the student’s academic progress

NB: Panel members are not normally the person who made the allegation of academic malpractice (i.e. the person who marked the assignment and initially established that there appeared to be evidence of alleged malpractice).

Actions to be taken following a Panel decision (School Administrative Officer).

Decisions will normally be emailed to the School Administrative Officer within 10 working days of the Hearing.

A copy of the letter should be placed on the student’s file. The School Administrative Officer shall ensure that the letter [P] is added to the student’s mark on the mark grids available to the School Examinations Board for the course unit concerned. This suffix will not be seen by the School Examinations Board unless a query arises as a result of a mark apparently out of line with others. The suffix shall not be shown on the official transcript for the student concerned.

If there is any confusion between the intentions of the Panel as regards outcome/penalty, and the interpretation of this by the relevant School (Examination) Boards, or if it is not clear how the outcome can be realised within the School, the Faculty Administrative Officer who attended the hearing should be informed immediately.

School Administrative Officers must maintain a record of the number and nature of cases dealt with at School level, including the level of penalty imposed will be required to report periodically on such cases as requested.

University Disciplinary Panel (UDP)

When referring a case to University level (Division of Campus Life), a Student Discipline Referral Form should be completed and sent to the Secretary of the UDP together with all relevant documents that it specifies.