2011-12 ALL COHORTS

PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND THE FABRICATION OF DATA:GUIDELINES FOR STAFF AND STUDENTS

Please note that this document is for guidance purposes only and the University’s formal policy, arrangements and procedures are contained in the document ‘Policy for Dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data’; therefore, the Policy document takes precedence over these Guidelines

WHAT ARE PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND FABRICATION OF DATA?

The definitions below apply to all types of work submitted by students, including, for example, written work, diagrams, designs, charts, musical compositions and pictures:

Plagiarism occurs when a student misrepresents, as his/her own work, the work, written or otherwise, of any other person (including another student) or of any institution. Examples of forms of plagiarism include: the verbatim (word for word) copying of another’s work without appropriate and correctly presented

acknowledgement; the close paraphrasing of another’s work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation,

without appropriate and correctly presented acknowledgement; unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another’s work; the deliberate and detailed presentation of another’s concept as one’s own.

When plagiarism is suspected it should fall into one of two categories:

Minor Plagiarism – this is defined as a small amount of paraphrasing, quotation or use of diagrams, charts etc. without adequate citation. Minor plagiarism may result from poor scholarship (i.e. when a student, through inexperience or carelessness, fails to reference appropriately or adequately identify the source of the material which they use).

Major Plagiarism – this is defined as: extensive paraphrasing or quoting without proper citation of the source; lifting directly from a text or other academic source without reference;

(Where material is taken directly from a text or other source the cited material should be demarcated with quotation marks or in some other accepted way and the source should be cited.)

the use of essays (or parts thereof) from essay banks, either downloaded from the internet or obtained from other sources;

presenting another’s designs or concepts as one’s own; continued instances of what was initially regarded as minor plagiarism despite warnings having been given to

the student concerned.

Collusion occurs when, unless with official approval (e.g. in the case of group projects), two or more students consciously collaborate in the preparation and production of work which is ultimately submitted by each in an identical, or substantially similar, form and/or is represented by each to be the product of his or her individual efforts. Collusion also occurs where there is unauthorised co-operation between a student and another person in the preparation and production of work which is presented as the student’s own.

Fabrication of Data

Embellishment of data – this occurs when a small amount of data is enhanced or exaggerated in order to emphasise data which has been obtained by legitimate means.

Fabrication of data – this occurs when a student creates and presents an extensive amount or significant piece of data in order to conceal a paucity of legitimate data; or wholly fabricates a set of data in the absence of legitimate data.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 1 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

THE PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND THE FABRICATION OF DATA

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 2 of 15

Plagiarism, fabrication of data or collusion is suspected in a student’s work and the case is investigated

The case will fall into the category of Minor Plagiarism/Embellishment of Data or Major Plagiarism/Collusion or Fabrication of Data (see definitions, above)

The appropriate penalty is applied and a note placed on the student’s records

The student may be asked to provide an explanation of the circumstances

The student’s records are checked for previous cases of plagiarism, collusion or the fabrication of data

The case should be evidenced and documented by staff and the appropriate procedure instigated

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

PART A – GUIDELINES FOR STAFF

1. EXAMINER1 – WHAT TO DO IF YOU SUSPECT PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION OR FABRICATION OF DATA

1.1 Evidence – if you suspect plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data in a student’s work, you should ensure that it is evidenced and documented in order to be able to proceed further.

1.2 Category of offence – having collated evidence of the suspected offence, you should determine whether it

falls into the category of minor plagiarism, embellishment of data, major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, in accordance with the definitions above.

1.3 Minor plagiarism/embellishment of data - if you have determined that the offence is minor plagiarism or embellishment of data you should follow the procedure detailed in section 2 below.

1.4 Major plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data – if you have determined that the offence is major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data you should follow the procedure detailed in section 3 below.

Notes:

1.5 Copying another student’s work – if you suspect that one or more students have copied the work of another student in any form without his/her knowledge, this should be recorded as minor or major plagiarism (as appropriate) and any resulting warning or penalty (as applicable) should apply only to the student(s) that copied the work.

1.6 A student has allowed another student to copy his/her work – if you suspect this, it should be recorded as collusion committed by all the students involved.

2. EXAMINER – PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH MINOR PLAGIARISM OR EMBELLISHMENT OF DATA

2.1 Check the student’s records – if you have evidenced and documented a suspected offence in a student’s work and determined that it is minor plagiarism or embellishment of data, you should ensure the student’s records are checked for any previous cases of plagiarism (minor or major), collusion, or embellishment or fabrication of data.

2.2 Issue a warning – if the student’s records show no previous offence has been recorded, or if a single offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data has been recorded, then you should issue a written warning to the student (see Appendices 1 and 2 to these Guidelines for templates that can be used for this purpose).

2.3 Record the offence and inform the Assessment Officer 2 – having issued a warning in accordance with 2.2 above, you should place a note on the student’s records, including their records in SPIDER 3, detailing the nature of the offence and the action taken. You should also inform the Assessment Officer for the department which owns the module of the offence committed and the action taken.

2.4 Penalty – under these Guidelines (and the University’s Policy for Dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data) there is no penalty applied for a student’s first or second offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data. You should use your academic judgement in determining an appropriate mark for the assessment, in accordance with the relevant marking criteria and taking into account, as appropriate, matters such as the quality/accuracy of the referencing and citations, the quality of data presented, etc.

Notes:

2.5 Previous offences noted on the student’s records – if you find that the student’s records show two previous warnings for minor plagiarism or embellishment of data, or if their record shows that the student has

1 ‘Examiner’ in these Guidelines refers to the person responsible for marking an assessment/examination.2 In respect of this and all references to the Assessment Officer in these Guidelines it should be noted that the corresponding officer for on-line programmes is the Director of On-line Studies3 In respect of this and all references to SPIDER in these Guidelines it should be noted that for on-line programmes an alternative records system may be used.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 3 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

previously committed an offence of major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, then you should instigate the procedure detailed in section 3 below.

2.6 Counting the warnings given – a second warning for minor plagiarism/embellishment of data cannot be counted as such and should be disregarded if a student has not yet received the first warning, as the student will not have had an opportunity to take heed of the warning and improve their work. Similarly a third warning, (which would lead to the procedures used for major plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data) would not count as a third warning and should be disregarded if the student had not received the second warning; again the student will not have had the opportunity to improve their work. This is intended to cover situations where assessments are completed and marked within a short period of time. For this section to apply it needs to be clear that the student has not received the earlier warning.

3. EXAMINER – PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION OR FABRICATION OF DATA

3.1 Report the offence to the Assessment Officer – if you have evidenced and documented a suspected offence in a student’s work and determined that it is major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, or you find previous offences noted in their records as detailed in 2.5 above, you should report the offence to the Assessment Officer for the student’s department.

3.2 Investigate the offence –the Assessment Officer will investigate the offence and will invite you to provide your evidence and reasons for making the allegation and will invite the student(s) to provide an explanation of the circumstances for the plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data. The student(s) must be afforded the opportunity to make any representations that they may wish to make. If this involves a face-to-face meeting between you, the Assessment Officer and the student(s), then they will be entitled to be accompanied by another member of the University, e.g. a fellow student. (A template for notifying a student of an alleged offence is at Appendix 3 to these Guidelines.)

3.3 Report your conclusions to the Board of Examiners – if the Assessment Officer conclude that major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data has taken place, the Assessment Officer must provide a report to the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners, detailing his/her findings, the circumstances of the alleged offence, the investigation undertaken and the representations made by the student(s). A copy of this must also be made available to the student(s). Neither the Assessment Officer nor the Examiner can take part in the decision taken by the Board of Examiners.

Notes:

3.4 See section 2.6 above which explains that students must be informed that a case of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data has been found, before the procedure for another case can be instigated.

4. THE CHAIR AND THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS – DEALING WITH MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND FABRICATION OF DATA

4.1 The report from the Assessment Officer – when the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners receives the report described in 3.3 above, s/he should consult with the other members of the Board to determine whether the findings of the Assessment Officer are appropriate and acceptable.

4.2 Check other work submitted by the student(s) – if the Chair and the Board are satisfied with the findings detailed in the report, the Board should arrange for other work submitted by the student(s) for assessment to be scrutinised for other instances of plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data. Further scrutiny of work should not be done in cases of major plagiarism that have arisen as a result of an accumulation of acts of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data. The Board of Examiners can only scrutinise other work by the student that is from the year of study in which the major plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data occurred; the Board cannot review work from a previous year (or years) of study which the student has already passed.

4.3 Recording the offence – the Board of Examiners should ensure that the minutes of the Board’s meeting accurately record the decision making process and is responsible for ensuring the decision is noted in the students’ record, including their records on SPIDER. The Board should then apply the penalties as detailed in section 5 below.

5. PENALTIES FOR MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION, FABRICATION OF DATA

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 4 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

5.1 Awarding a mark of zero – if the Board of Examiners finds that a student has committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data they should award a mark of zero for the assessment. If two or more students are found to have colluded in producing a piece of assessed work, then each student should be given a mark of zero for the assessment. If the mark of zero is to be applied to a postgraduate taught dissertation or project, the Board shall also whether the student can re-submit a revised and corrected version of the dissertation or project, or whether the student must complete and submit a whole new dissertation or project.

5.2 Termination of studies – if the Board of Examiners finds that a student on a taught postgraduate programme has committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data in respect of their dissertation or project, and in the opinion of the Board it is of a serious nature or extensive in scale, the Board may decide that the student’s studies be terminated, even if it is their first offence.

5.3 Failure to satisfy the requirements of the programme – if a student is found to have committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data on a third occasion, namely three offences of the same type or any combination of major plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data, the Board of Examiners shall determine that the student has failed to satisfy the requirements of the programme. In such circumstances, the Board should also determine whether or not any award is to be made to the student.

6. PROCEDURE IN RELATION TO RESEARCH DEGREES

The policy for dealing with plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data in research degrees is addressed in a separate policy document.

7. GENERAL ADVICE

The following general points about plagiarism should be noted.

7.1 Plagiarism is not always a deliberate act. For example, inexperienced students might not properly reference information that has been obtained from another source, without any deliberate intent to deceive.

7.2 Some students, particularly international students, might come from academic backgrounds where plagiarism (as we know it) is not considered wrong and can even be considered a mark of respect to the original author. Some students for whom English is a second language may not feel sufficiently confident to assimilate and represent the views of the original author and so lift wording directly from the text. Sometimes students can plagiarise without being aware that they are quoting another source. For example, students may repeat ideas from a textbook or a lecture without even being aware that they are doing so, and so do not reference the source. Such circumstances would not be regarded as an excuse for more experienced students who are suspected of plagiarism.

7.3 Early advice on the nature of plagiarism and training in citation and referencing is important to help students avoid committing plagiarism. ‘Plagiarism – A Good Practice Guide’ by Jude Carroll and Jon Appleton 4

identifies a number of recommendations for good practice that may help lessen the number of instances of plagiarism.

8. WHAT YOU CAN DO

Taking the following actions may help staff combat plagiarism and collusion:

8.1 Change assessments regularly – if you use the same essay titles regularly or set the same case studies or practical, this increases the opportunity for students to plagiarise the work of others.

8.2 Review learning outcomes – you should review the learning outcomes of the module/programme so that students are required to demonstrate analysis, evaluation and synthesis rather than simply knowledge and understanding. If students are required to demonstrate their own thoughts and ideas, they will find it more difficult to plagiarise the ideas of others.

4 ‘Plagiarism – A Good Practice Guide’, Jude Carroll and Jon Appleton, Oxford Brookes University/JISC, May 2001 – http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/brookes.pdf

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 5 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

8.3 Citation and referencing skills – it is helpful if you can add citation and referencing skills to the list of learning outcomes of some modules. This is particularly useful in the early stages of a student’s academic career, in order to help them to understand plagiarism and how to avoid it.

8.4 Record keeping – it is useful to develop a system for keeping records of instances of plagiarism and collusion in relation to individual assessments or modules in order to monitor whether it is particularly prevalent in certain areas of the syllabus, and whether particular strategies and initiatives are effective in combating the problem.

8.5 Plagiarism detection software – there are various software packages available that can help to detect instances of plagiarism. Departments should consider the appropriateness of using such software and the assessments to which it can be applied. However, if you are using this type of software, academic judgement must still be exercised in order to determine whether an offence of minor or major plagiarism has been committed.

9. RESPONSIBILITIES

9.1 Prompt investigation – if an offence is suspected in relation to work submitted by a student, in the interest of helping students to avoid continued acts of plagiarism, collusion, fabrication of data, cases should be investigated as promptly as possible.

9.2 Student declaration – all departments5 should require students, when submitting work for summative assessment, to provide either a signed hard-copy declaration or an equivalent acknowledgement where electronic submission is used, to confirm that they have not plagiarised material, nor have they fabricated any of the data nor have they colluded in producing the work. Appendix 4 to these Guidelines may be used for this purpose, but departments may use their own procedures/forms to obtain the necessary declaration. Where anonymous marking of assessments is carried out, departments should establish procedures for the declarations to be separated from the work to be assessed before being passed to the marker(s).

9.3 Fitness to practise – for some vocational and/or professional programmes there may be requirements for students to meet specified standards in respect of their fitness to practise in the relevant vocation or profession. Where a finding of plagiarism, collusion and/or fabrication of data against a student may call into question the student’s fitness to practise, this must be clearly stated in the programme information provided to students.

5 The departmental responsibility referred to here should fall to the relevant body in the case of on-line programmes.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 6 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

PART B – GUIDELINES FOR STUDENTS

[Please note that these Guidelines apply to undergraduate and postgraduate taught provision only; there is a separate policy document for postgraduate research programmes.]

10. MINOR PLAGIARISM, EMBELLISHMENT OF DATA

10.1 You receive a warning – Appendices 1 and 2 to these Guidelines shows suggested templates for a warning that will be issued to you if an examiner6 finds that you have committed an offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data, in accordance with the definitions of these terms above.

10.2 What will happen if you receive a warning? – You will not receive a penalty for your first or second offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data under the procedures outlined in these Guidelines or detailed in the University’s Policy for Dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data. However, in committing these offences the overall quality of the relevant assessment is likely to be adversely affected and this could be reflected in the mark awarded. The fact that minor plagiarism or embellishment of data has been found in your work and that you have been issued with a warning will be noted in your student records, including your SPIDER records.

10.3 What happens if you get a third warning? – If you commit minor plagiarism/embellishment of data for a third time the procedure for major plagiarism, collusion, embellishment of data will be instigated; see section 11 below.

11. MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION OR FABRICATION OF DATA

11.1 You are informed that you are suspected of committing major plagiarism, collusion, fabrication of data – this means that either:

an examiner suspects major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data in work submitted by you; or an examiner has found an instance of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data in your work and upon

checking your records, has found that you have had two previous warnings for minor plagiarism/embellishment of data (see 10.3 above).

11.2 Your opportunity to make representations – when you are informed of an allegation of major plagiarism, collusion, fabrication of data, you will be given the chance to explain the circumstances of the alleged offence and to make any representations you wish. You may provide this in writing or request a face-to-face meeting. The meeting will be conducted by the Assessment Officer for your department or school and the examiner who raised the allegation will be present; if you wish, you may bring another member of the University to attend this meeting with you, such as a fellow student.

11.3 What happens next? – after considering your representations and the evidence from the examiner, if the Assessment Officer finds that major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data have been committed, the Assessment Officer7 will produce a report for the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners. The report will explain the circumstances of the offence; the investigation undertaken; the representations made by you, the student; and detail the findings of the Assessment Officer. You will receive a copy of this report.

11.4 At the Board of Examiners – the Chair will consult the Board of Examiners to decide whether it deems the findings of the Assessment Officer appropriate and acceptable. If the Chair and the Board are satisfied with the findings, they will then arrange for other work submitted by you for assessment to be scrutinised to determine if there are any previously undetected instances of plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data. Further scrutiny of work will not be done in cases of major plagiarism that have arisen as a result of an accumulation of acts of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data. The Board of Examiners can only scrutinise other work by you that is from the year of study in which the major plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data occurred; the Board cannot review work from a previous year (or years) of study which you have already passed. The Board will ensure that details of the offence are noted in your student records, including the SPIDER8 records.

6 The ‘examiner’ is the person responsible for marking your work.7 For on-line programmes the Assessment Officer has the title of Director of On-line Studies.8 Students on on-line programmes should note that a different records system may be used.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 7 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

11.5 Penalties – if the Board of Examiners finds that you have committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, the penalties to be applied are as follows:

(a) First or second offence – for your first and second offence you will be awarded a mark of zero for the assessment. If, as a result of receiving zero for the assessment you fail the module as a whole, you may be required to re-take the assessment unless you are in the final year of an undergraduate degree programme, in which case you will only be permitted to re-take the assessment if failing the module would result in you being awarded a pass degree or being awarded no degree. You should note that if there is no re-sit opportunity provided for the assessment for which you are awarded zero and you have failed the module, you may be unable to progress to your next year of study. If you are a master’s student (postgraduate taught degree) and you are awarded zero and as a result you fail your dissertation or project, the Board of Examiners will decide whether you can re-submit the dissertation or project, revised and corrected, or whether you must complete and submit a whole new dissertation or project.

(b) Penalty for collusion – if you have colluded with another student or students, and this includes one student allowing another to copy his/her work and submit it as his/her own, each of you will be awarded a mark of zero for the assessment. The same re-sit provision as detailed in (a) above applies.

(c) Third offence – if you are found to have committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data on a third occasion, namely three offences of the same type or any combination of major plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data, the Board of Examiners shall determine that you have failed to satisfy the requirements of the programme. The Board will also determine whether any award should be made to you.

(d) Dissertation or project on taught postgraduate degrees – if you are a student on a taught postgraduate masters programme (MA or MSc) and the offence you have committed was in respect of your dissertation or project, the Board of Examiners may decide to terminate your studies if it considers that the offence was of a serious nature or extensive in scale. This penalty can be applied even if it is your first offence.

(e) Fitness to practice – some vocational and/or professional programmes may require students to meet specified standards in respect of their fitness to practise in the relevant vocation or profession. This could mean that a finding of plagiarism, collusion and/or fabrication of data against you may call into question your fitness to practise. If this is the case, it will be stated in the programme information provided to you.

12. CAN YOU APPEAL?

12.1 The findings of the Assessment Officer and examiner – you may only appeal against their findings on the grounds of material irregularity, or procedural or administrative error in the conduct of the investigation into the offence.

12.2 The decision of the Board of Examiners – you may not appeal against the decision of the Board of Examiners other than in accordance with the Code of Practice on Assessment, Appendix F, Assessment Appeals Procedure; available via the following link:http://www.liv.ac.uk/students/student-administration-centre/policies-procedures/appeals.htm

12.3 The decision of the Panel of Examiners for research degrees – you may not appeal against the decision of the Panel of Examiners except on the grounds of procedural and/or material irregularity.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 8 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

TECHNICAL NOTES FOR STAFF – for entering incidents of plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data on SPIDER

I. When a student has been found guilty of plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, staff in academic departments should record this against the student’s record in SPIDER. Access to the appropriate screen in SPIDER is restricted so Heads of Department are required to nominate an individual to whom special access will be granted by the Student Spider Manager based in the Student Administration and Support Division. Deletion of any such record once committed to the database has to be referred to the Director of Student Administration and Support.

II. Detailed technical instructions on how to record the information in SPIDER is available from SAS. There are facilities within SPIDER to record the specific contravention (e.g. major/minor plagiarism/fabrication of data etc.), the academic session the incident relates to, the actual date, the relevant module code and the person reporting the incident. There is provision for free text entry to provide details of the incident.

III. Data stored in SPIDER relating to plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data is available for report and monitoring using Business Objects. Advice on this can be obtained from SAS.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 9 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

PROCESS FOR DEALING WITH MINOR PLAGIARISM OR EMBELLISHMENT OF DATA

* In respect of this and the following flow chart, for all references to SPIDER it should be noted that for on-line programmes an alternative records system may be used.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 10 of 15

Case of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data identified by the examiner.

The examiner checks the student’s records. Has the student received a previous warning about plagiarism and/or embellishment of data?

NOYES

Issue a written warning. Do not apply a penalty. A copy of the warning should be placed on the student’s record and record the incident in SPIDER.

If only one previous warning has been issued, give the student a second written warning. Do not apply a penalty. Place a copy of the warning on record and record the incident in SPIDER*

If two previous warnings have been issued, initiate the procedure for dealing with major plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data.

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

PROCESS FOR DEALING WITH MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND FABRICATION OF DATA

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 11 of 15

Examiner identifies major plagiarism, fabrication of data or collusion in a student’s work.

The Examiner reports the matter to the Assessment Officer in the department that ‘owns’ the module.

The Assessment Officer and the Examiner invite the student to provide an explanation of the circumstances behind the suspected plagiarism or collusion

and investigate the matter.

If plagiarism, fabrication or collusion is found, the Assessment Officer advises the Chair if the Board of Examiners of the

case.

If plagiarism, fabrication or collusion is not found, the

matter need not be progressed.

If this is the first or second instance of major plagiarism, fabrication or collusion

by the student, the Chair consults with the Board of Examiners

If the case is accepted, a mark of zero should be awarded. In cases of collusion, all students involved should be awarded

zero. Record the incident in SPIDER

If, as a result of the mark of zero, they fail the module as a whole, they will be

required to re-take the assessment to which the plagiarism, fabrication or collusion related. For non-clinical

programmes, the resulting mark will be capped at the designated pass mark for the module for carry forward and final assessment purposes. Where a re-sit opportunity for the assessment is not available, students may be unable to

progress to the next year of their studies.

If the student has two previous cases of major plagiarism,

fabrication or collusion on his or her record, namely three

offences of the same type or any combination of major plagiarism, collusion and

fabrication of data, the Board of Examiners shall determine that the student has failed to satisfy

the requirements of the programme. It shall also

determine in those circumstances whether or not any award is to be made to the

student. The student has a right of appeal against a decision of

the Board of Examiners through the assessment

appeals process.

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

APPENDIX 1

Minor Plagiarism

When marking the following assessment

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………I found plagiarised material within it. I have indicated on the returned assessment where the plagiarised material is. Plagiarism is committed when a student misrepresents, as his/her own work, the work, written or otherwise, of any other person (including another student) or of any institution. Plagiarism includes:

the word for word copying of another’s work without appropriate or correctly presented acknowledgement;

the close paraphrasing of another’s work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation, without appropriate or correctly presented acknowledgement;

unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another’s work; the deliberate and detailed presentation of another’s concept as one’s own.

“Another’s work” covers all material, including, for example, written work, diagrams, designs, charts, musical compositions and pictures, from all sources, including for example, the internet, journals, textbooks and essays.

The plagiarism which I found was on a limited scale and it is possible that you committed it unintentionally by forgetting to reference properly the material which you used. Nevertheless, the University views all plagiarism seriously. On this occasion I am issuing you with a warning only, copies of which will be placed on your file and sent to your departmental Assessment Officer.

The University will allow you to receive two warnings for minor plagiarism and/or embellishment of data. After two such warnings, if you are suspected of having committed minor plagiarism and/or embellishment of data again you will be regarded as persisting in this practice and the matter will be referred to your departmental Assessment Officer for investigation on behalf of the Board of Examiners. Any instance of alleged major plagiarism will also be immediately referred to the Assessment Officer. The penalty for proven major plagiarism is that a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment.

If you would like further guidance on referencing, citation etc. to help you avoid committing plagiarism, you should (information about where to seek guidance).

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 12 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

APPENDIX 2

EMBELLISHMENT OF DATA

When marking the following assessment:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

I found embellished data within it. I have indicated on the returned assessment where the embellished data is. Embellished data is defined by the University as a small amount of data which is fabricated in order to emphasise or embellish data which has been obtained by legitimate means.

The University views all embellishment of data seriously. On this occasion I am issuing you with a warning only, copies of which will be placed on your file and sent to your departmental Assessment Officer.

The University will allow you to receive two warnings for embellishment of data and/or minor plagiarism. After two such warnings, if you are suspected of having committed embellishment and/or minor plagiarism again you will be regarded as persisting in this practice and the matter will be referred to your departmental Assessment Officer for investigation on behalf of the Board of Examiners.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 13 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

APPENDIX 3

Plagiarism/Collusion/Fabrication of Data

It has been reported to me, as Assessment Officer, that you are suspected of having committed plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data in the preparation of the following assessment:

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………....

.......................................................................................................................................................................The attached document contains details of the alleged plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data.

The University’s procedures require me to investigate this matter and to make a report to the Board of Examiners. You now have an opportunity to provide an explanation of the alleged plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data and to make any representations which you wish to. You may do this either in writing or at a face-to-face meeting with myself; name of examiner who reported the alleged plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data to me will also be present at this meeting. Please either provide me with a written explanation of the alleged plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data or make a request for a face-to-face meeting by (date). If you request a face-to-face meeting, you will be entitled to be accompanied by another member of the University, e.g. a fellow student.

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 14 of 15

2011-12 ALL COHORTS

APPENDIX 4

DECLARATION ON PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND FABRICATION OF DATA

NAME…………………………………………….. STUDENT NUMBER………………………………....

MODULE TITLE/CODE……………………………………………………………………………………...

TITLE OF WORK…………………………………………………………………….……………………….

This form should be completed by the student and appended to any piece of work that is submitted for summative assessment.

Section 8.1 of the University’s Code of Practice on Assessment provides the following definition of plagiarism:

“Plagiarism occurs when a student misrepresents, as his/her own work, the work, written or otherwise, of any other person (including another student) or of any institution. Examples of forms of plagiarism include:

the verbatim (word for word) copying of another’s work without appropriate and correctly presented acknowledgement;

the close paraphrasing of another’s work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation, without appropriate and correctly presented acknowledgement;

unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another’s work; the deliberate and detailed presentation of another’s concept as one’s own.”

“Another’s work” covers all material, including, for example, written work, diagrams, designs, charts, musical compositions and pictures, from all sources, including, for example, the internet, journals, textbooks and essays.

Section 8.1 of the University’s Code of Practice on Assessment provides the following definition of collusion:

“Collusion occurs when, unless with official approval (e.g. in the case of group projects), two or more students consciously collaborate in the preparation and production of work which is ultimately submitted by each in an identical, or substantially similar, form and/or is represented by each to be the product of his or her individual efforts. Collusion also occurs where there is unauthorised co-operation between a student and another person in the preparation and production of work which is presented as the student’s own.”

Section 8.1 of the University’s Code of Practice on Assessment provides the following definition of the fabrication of data:Fabrication of data occurs when a student presents data which s/he has not obtained by legitimate means of experimentation or enquiry.

Further information on plagiarism, collusion and the fabrication of data can be found in departmental/programme handbooks. Students found to have committed plagiarism, fabricated data or to have colluded in the production of work for assessment are liable to receive a mark of zero for the assessment concerned. Subsequent offences will attract more severe penalties, including possible termination of studies.

STUDENT DECLARATION

I confirm that I have read and understood the above definitions of plagiarism, collusion and the fabrication of data. I confirm that I have not committed plagiarism or fabrication of data when completing the attached piece of work, nor have I colluded with any other student in the preparation and production of this work.

SIGNATURE………………………………………………………DATE…………………………………..

TQSD/Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data – Staff/Student Guidelines/2011-12/v.2 15 of 15