Faculty of Humanities

							                              Faculty of Humanities

     Information for Faculty Academic Malpractice/Student Discipline
                                Hearings


The format in which cases for Academic Malpractice Hearings documentation
come to the Faculty varies widely across Schools. It is not always clear which
programme the student is registered for. In most cases, we have to establish
the credit rating of the course unit (these vary at UG level between 10, 20, 30
and 40, and at PGT level between 15, 30 and 60), as well as the proportion of
overall assessment the plagiarised piece of work is worth. Given that the
principle applies: the greater the proportion, the greater the offence, we need
to know that student A has been accused of plagiarising work that is worth
100% of a 20-credit module, whereas student B has been accused of
plagiarism in an assignment that is worth 33% of a 10-credit module. This is
because the procedures governing discipline cases require panels to apply a
proportionate penalty, ie one that is not disproportionate to the offence.

It is often difficult for Faculty staff to find details of course units if these are not
on the documentation supplied by Schools. Although the Faculty has a
directory of UG course units, some Schools’ units do not appear on this.
Sometimes the information is out of date, or the allegation may relate back to
the previous session and, in the meantime, details such as credit-rating or
assessment arrangements may have changed. PGT information is often not
easy to find on School websites. It is much better if such detail is supplied by
Schools in a standard format as it is Schools that will have the most up-to-
date information. Most Schools do this anyway, but the information is not
presented consistently as things stand at present.

We also need up-to-date contact details for the student(s) – something the
School is much more likely to have since most Schools write to students to tell
them that their case has been forwarded to the Faculty. For the purpose of
submitting data for the Annual Report to Senate on Discipline cases, we need
no more than is requested on this new form as general biodata is already on
CRM records.

Schools also need to ensure that they have someone lined up to represent
the School on the three-person Malpractice Panel. This comprises the AD
T&L* (Chair), Head of Academic Services* and School representative. The
school rep should be communicated to the Faculty along with the details of
the case so that we can start arranging a panel hearing as quickly as possible.
The school rep cannot be the person who discovered the offence. S/he should
have been fully briefed on the case and have an awareness of the effect
various penalties (as set out in the guidance document) might have on the
student’s progression. This guidance is available at:

           http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/display.aspx?DocID=639

* or their alternates
Schools must include with the case any relevant information on the student’s
progress to date (eg marks grids) as panels are required to take account of
the effect of any penalty on a student’s progression.

Again, in the interest of consistency we need to tidy up the actual physical
presentation of the material being investigated. To that end, we have included
the following guidelines: “Essays and source materials must be underlined in
black ink only, and should be comprehensively cross-referenced with
each other. Any cases not being presented in this way may have to be
returned to the school.”

It is important that the material is marked up by the School. The Faculty
neither has the resources to do this, nor would it be fair for the investigating
body to prepare the evidence of the alleged offence.

For these reasons, I propose to ask Schools to use a standard form (attached)
to accompany malpractice cases forwarded to Faculty. In most cases, this will
involve Schools providing more or less what they do at present, only perhaps
differently ordered. We are developing a checklist for Schools so that we can
all be sure we have the information necessary to give students a fair hearing.

This paper is going to the HoSA meeting for consideration and will then be
circulated further directly to those handling malpractice cases in Schools and
via the Faculty Networks of administrators.


NF~FacAcadMalpFeb2010
                                Faculty of Humanities

   Information for Faculty Academic Malpractice/Student Discipline Hearings


School:

STUDENT SURNAME:
STUDENT FIRST NAME:
Gender:

Student University ID no:
Home/overseas status:

Student’s address in the UK:
[Note: this is the address the Faculty will use to write to the student. If the student is
no longer in the UK, please let us have a current address overseas.]




Student’s email addresses:

Student’s phone numbers:

Name of programme:
Year of programme:

Code number(s) of course unit(s):

Title(s) of course unit(s):

Credit rating of course unit(s):

Proportion of assessment involved:
[Note: what we are looking for here is the proportion of the assessment for the course
unit for which there is a disciplinary case to answer, eg course unit ABCD 1001 is
worth 20 credits and is assessed by means of a presentation (10% of marks), and
two assessed essays, the first worth 30% of marks and the second worth 60% of
marks. If the allegation is that student x has committed academic malpractice in the
first essay, therefore the Proportion of assessment involved is 30%. If it was the
second essay, the proportion would be 60%, and if both essays, it would be 90%.
This is important information for the panel as we are required to apply penalties that
are proportionate to the offence.]

Turnitin report included:      YES            NO      [please delete as appropriate]

Previous academic malpractice offences relating to this programme (please
specify briefly, including level, eg UG, Y2; PGT etc):
Academic representing the School at a malpractice hearing:
[Note: this must not be the person who discovered the alleged malpractice.]

Any other relevant information:

Please include with the case any relevant information on the student’s progress to
date (eg marks grids) as panels are required to take account of the effect of any
penalty on a student’s progression.

Please ensure that the materials for the case are properly marked up, ie essays and
source materials must be underlined in black ink only, and should be
comprehensively cross-referenced with each other. Any cases not presented in
this way may have to be returned to the school. Case materials for the panel
hearing are copied on a black and white photocopier. This will not pick up certain
colours or highlighter markings.

If a Turnitin Report is being submitted, please indicate above on form. Please note
also that a Turnitin Report alone may not be sufficient to identify the extent and
seriousness of the alleged offence. In such cases, the panel will expect to see
marked up evidence of the source materials for malpractice cases.

Please send this form, together with the papers for the case, to:

Ewan Hannah, Room G14, Devonshire House, Faculty of Humanities
ewan.hannah@manchester.ac.uk

NF~FacAcadMalpFeb2010
                                  Document Control

Policy Title:           Information and proforma for Faculty Academic
                        Malpractice/Student Discipline Hearings
                           th
Date Approved:          11 March 2010
Approving Body:         Teaching and Learning Administrators’ Network
Version:                1.0
Supersedes:             N/A
Previous Review         N/A
Dates:
Next Review Date        March 2011
Related Statutes,
Ordinances,
General
Regulations:
Related Policies:
Related
Procedures:
Related Guidance        Academic Malpractice – Guidance on the Handling of Cases
and/or Codes of         Guidance to Students on Plagiarism and other forms of
Practice:               Academic Malpractice
                        Plagiarism and other forms of academic malpractice - guidance
                        for teaching staff
Related
Information:
Policy Owner:           Teaching and Learning Administrators’ Network
Lead Contact:           Neil Ferguson