Introduction
The following guide outlines the definition, types, process and outcomes of an issue of Academic Misconduct. For queries relating the this guide, please contact registrarsoffice@ncirl.ie
Quick Start Guide For Students
Although full details are fleshed out in the article below, this section provides a high level overview of the process for a student who has been referred for a suspected case of Academic Misconduct.
- The lecturer will invite the student to meet.
- If suspicions are confirmed or remain; the lecturer will seek a second opinion of a qualified staff member.
- If second opinion agrees; the lecturer refers the student through the Academic Integrity Form to the Registrar's office.
- The Registrar's office and lecturer will agree a provisonal sanction, which will be emailed to the student. The student may then:
- A) If sanction is at levels 1-3 the learner has the opportunity to 'reject' the sanction and request a hearing of the Academic Integrity Panel.
- B) Accept the sanction. The Lecturer who referred the student will confirm the next steps and resubmission details.
- C) If the sanction is deemed to be at Level 4, or the student is in award year, the student must attend an Academic Integrity Panel hearing who will speak with the student and decide an appropriate action.
- The decision of the Academic Integrity Panel will decide the ultimate sanction for cases at L4 or Award Year. The student may still appeal this decision to the Appeals Committee.
Suspected Incidents of Academic Misconduct
Any behaviour or action which contravenes academic integrity and breaches its fundamental values of honesty, trust, fairness, respect, responsibility, and courage is considered to constitute Academic Misconduct.
NCI reserves the right to avail of any technological or other means available to it to detect suspected occurrence(s) of plagiarism or any other act of academic misconduct in respect of any assessment or other academic activity undertaken by any of its learners.
When a suspected incidence of academic misconduct occurs during an examination setting, it will be addressed in accordance with the College’s Examinations and Assessment Regulations.
Where a suspected incidence of academic misconduct by any learner other than in an examination occurs, it will be investigated in accordance with the provisions of the Academic Integrity Policy.
Where a suspected incidence of academic misconduct comes to the attention of any member of the College’s staff, they are required to notify the relevant authority such as the Programme/ Course Director, Lecturer or equivalent in the School in which the learner is enrolled. Following an assessment of the suspected breach by the appropriate subject matter expert(s), the relevant Lecturer, School or Unit will refer the case via the Academic Integrity Form, which will calculate and classify the response/sanction (Level 1, Level 2, Level 3, or Level 4) for the suspected breach in accordance with the criteria provided.
A note on AI/Plagiarism
Please note that the use of AI is not in and of itself academic misconduct. Depending on how/why AI is used in a student assignment, it may be classified under any of the 'Types of Concern' below. For instance if a student uses AI to write an essay without their own significant input into the work, this would be deemed as plagiarism, not a seperate 'AI use' categorisation. Similarly, if a student were to falsify research results/data, this would be classed under the 'Falsification / Fabrication' category below.
Students must disclose when they use AI, and must be given the opportunity to do so via the Project Cover Sheet which contains a section for referencing AI usage.
Student guidance for the use of AI in assignments can be found here.
The college reserves the right for lecturers to ask students to attend a viva to explain their work at any point.
Response to Academic Misconduct (outcomes & consequence)
Academic misconduct includes offences such as plagiarism, collusion, falsification, and cheating in any undergraduate or postgraduate assessment or assignment. In cases of suspected academic misconduct, the lecturer responsible for assigning and/or grading the relevant assessment completes the Academic Integrity Form. The form calculates an indicative score according to the suspected severity of the offence. The score determines the recommended consequences.
In all cases, the lecturer will inform the student of the suspected academic misconduct and invite the student to meet with them. If suspicions of academic misconduct persist after the meeting, or if the student does not attend, the lecturer will seek the opinion of another qualified staff member, and if in agreement that there is academic misconduct, the lecturer will then use the academic integrity form to calculate the level of misconduct and to inform the office of the Registrar.
If for any reason the lecturer disagrees with the calculated outcome of the Academic Integrity form, they may reject the findings and discuss directly with the Registrar’s office. Likewise, if a student disagrees with the calculated outcome of the Academic Integrity form, they may reject the findings and discuss directly with the Registrar’s office.
The Schools may instead decide to have learner assignments not considered to be a valid submission; the lecturer may on reading the assignment decide that the learner has not answered the question or used sources not relevant. It is not marked and returned to the learner for resubmission.
Academic Misconduct/Dishonesty Types
Behaviours perpetrated by individuals or institutions that transgress ethical standards held in common between other individuals and/ or groups in institutions of education, research or scholarship[1]. Academic misconduct includes offences such as plagiarism, collusion, falsification including inappropriate AI usage and cheating in any undergraduate or postgraduate assessment or assignment.
In cases of suspected academic misconduct, the lecturer responsible for assigning and/or grading the relevant assessment will first meet with the student, and then complete the Academic Integrity Form. The form calculates an indicative score according to the suspected severity of the offence. The score determines the recommended consequences or ‘sanction’.
The ‘type of concern’ in the table below is a major step in the calculation of the severity and sanction of the misconduct.
| Type of concern | Description |
| Basic violations | Include, but are not limited to, submitting a limited portion of the same material more than once without prior authorisation; giving your own academic work to others even when doing so was not explicitly prohibited; attendance/participation points misrepresentation; violation of instructor policies if behaviour not listed elsewhere in the guidelines; poor academic writing skill e.g., poor referencing or the passing off of somebody else's ideas as if originally discovered by the learner, or small errors made through carelessness or misunderstanding |
| Limited plagiarism | Includes, but is not limited to, presenting work / ideas taken from other sources without proper acknowledgement. Paraphrasing from sources without attribution; verbatim copying from sources without attribution when what was copied was not a critical aspect (key, central ideas) of the assessment and impacted less than 30% of the assessment; plagiarism that includes false citations; looking online for a solution to an assessment and copying part of that solution/answer. Self-plagiarism could also fall into this category. |
| Extensive plagiarism | Includes, but is not limited to, plagiarism when the aspects copied are critical aspects of the assessment and/or constitute more than 30% of the assessment or impact the integrity of more than 30% of the assessment thus requiring a new assessment; extensively copying from another learner’s assessment without acknowledgment of their contribution; plagiarism that includes false citations. Mosaic copying/ scaffolding/ substantial similarity: An unoriginal piece of writing composed of acknowledged or unacknowledged extracts from several different sources. Where the key points and structure of another person’s work have been used as a scaffold (framework) for your own work, without acknowledging the source. This is plagiarism. Self-plagiarism that constitutes more than 30% of the assessment would also fall into this category. |
| Collusion | Undisclosed collaboration between two or more people on an assessment or task, which was supposed to be completed individually when clear information was provided to students. Collusion includes inappropriate or unauthorised collaboration by two or more people in the production and submission of assessment task; learners providing their work to another learner before the submission deadline, or for the purpose of the other learner’s plagiarism at any time. Allowing another (e.g., friend / relative /peer / tutor) to write / translate / significantly edit one's assessment without acknowledging that help. |
| Falsification / Fabrication | Includes, but is not limited to, altering a graded assessment provided by another person and submitting for re-grade; fabricating data for a lab or research assessment; submitting data you didn't yourself collect; lying/giving a false excuse to miss or receive unfair accommodation on an assessment. Types of major misconduct in an education, research or scholarship setting: Forging educational, research or scholarship content, images, data, equipment or processes so that they are inaccurately represented. Fabrication: Fabrication in the context of research means making up data, experiments, or other significant information in proposing conducting or reporting research. |
| Exam Cheating (including online and in class exams) | Action or behaviour that violates rules in an attempt to give one learner an unfair advantage over another. Exam cheating includes, but is not limited to, copying from another person or allowing another person to copy during an examination; having an unapproved aid directly related to the exam (e.g., ‘cheat sheets’; course-related notes; textbook; whether electronically or hard copy); having ubiquitous smart technology (e.g., mobile phone, smart watch) accessible during an exam. |
| Fraud / Impersonation | Actions that are intended to deceive for unfair advantage by violating academic regulations. Using intentional deception to gain academic credit. Fraud includes some of the most egregious violations – e.g. stealing or fraudulently obtaining answers to an assessment prompt/exam before submitting the assessment for grading; changing/helping to change any recorded assessment or course grade on an instructor's or university record; illicitly obtaining an assessment completed by another (without their knowledge) and submitting it (in part or whole) as one's own; submitting fake or false documents (e.g. medical notes) |
| Contract Cheating | Form of academic misconduct when a person uses an undeclared and/or unauthorised third party, online or directly, to assist them to produce work for academic credit or progression, whether or not payment or other favour is involved. Contract cheating is any behaviour whereby a learner arranges to have another person or entity (‘the provider’) complete (in part or total) an assessment (e.g. exam, test, quiz, assessment, paper, project, problems) for the learner. If the provider is also a student, both students are in violation. |
[1] Academic Integrity: National Principles and Lexicon of Common Terms, (2021) NAIN. P13
Sanctions
In all cases below where a student is referred through the Academic Misconduct form, and the case is upheld, the student will receive an outcome email, and the details of the academic misconduct are added to their student record for the duration of their enrolment in the programme.
At Levels 1-3 Learners may choose to reject the findings of the Academic Misconduct and request a hearing by the Academic Integrity Panel. In this case the Registrar’s office will organise a meeting with the Academic Integrity Committee.
|
Level 1 Poor Academic Practice |
Level 2 Academic Misconduct (Minor) |
Level 3 Academic Misconduct (Major) |
| The learner is required to amend their work, or resit their exam, which is then reassessed with no penalty to the mark. |
The learner is required to repeat the assessment or examination and the component mark will be capped at the pass mark. This result may not be confirmed until the repeat examination board meeting.*
|
The learner is required to repeat the assessment or examination and the mark for the module is capped at the pass mark. This result may not be confirmed until the repeat examination board meeting.*
|
|
Level 4 Academic Misconduct (Serious/Severe) |
||
|
The Office of the Registrar writes to the learner to attend an Academic Integrity Meeting on a specified date. If the learner and or/representative is unable to attend, or chooses not to attend, the learner is given one opportunity to reschedule before a sanction is decided by the committee. The Academic Integrity Meeting is attended by:
The Academic Integrity Meeting sets out to determine at what level (if at all) academic misconduct has occurred and selects an appropriate consequence, considering any mitigating circumstances. |
||
Sanctions for Academic Misconduct in Award Year
Learners who commit academic misconduct during the 'award year' of their programs are subject to a distinct set of sanctions compared to those not in their award year. *Specifically, offenses categorized under Levels 2 and 3 will be automatically directed to Academic Integrity Panel who will make a decision based upon the facts of the case.
Appeals
Appeals occur where a learner disagrees with the findings of the Academic Integrity Panel.
- The decision of the Academic Integrity Panel on offences may be appealed by the learner concerned or by the Registrar (on behalf of the College) to the Appeals Committee appointed by the Academic Council. The Appeals Committee shall be constituted as follows:
- Vice President
- Two members of the academic faculty
- One learner representative who sits on the Student's Union Executive
Four members of the Appeals Committee shall constitute a quorum. The Vice President may nominate an alternative when s/he is unavailable. In the event of a tied vote the Vice President or his/her nominee shall exercise the casting vote.
- Notice of Appeal from decisions of the Academic Integrity Panel shall be lodged in writing within 10 working days by the learner(s) on receiving notification of the decision or penalty of the Disciplinary Committee. The written notice of appeal must state briefly the grounds on which the appeal is made. The Appeals Committee shall endeavour to reach its decision by majority and shall in its discretion decide if the outcome given should be increased, lessened, or remain unchanged. The learner(s) will be notified in writing that they are requested to attend the Appeals Committee. The learner(s) will be given no less than 72 hours notice to attend the committee.
- Decisions of the Appeals Committee shall be final.
Rules Regarding All Breaches of this Policy
- The provisions of this paragraph shall apply to all offences equally.
- A member of the Academic Integrity Panel may not be a member of any Appeals Committee considering the same case.
- No member of the Academic Integrity Panel or of the Appeals Committee shall adjudicate in any case in which she/he is to prosecute or be a witness. An accused person has the right to speak in her/his own defence and call witnesses, including character witnesses, at hearings of the Academic Integrity/Appeals Committee. Persons reporting instances may also call witnesses. An accused person may also be represented at any hearing. The Academic Integrity/Appeals Committee may seek advice from any expert or person they think fit and shall have the right to invite such persons to attend at any hearing of the Academic Integrity/Appeals Committee.
- The College may make regulations governing the conduct of appeal hearings and the procedures applicable to academic integrity issues.
- The learner under normal circumstances will attend an Academic Integrity/Appeal Committee hearing when established. In unforeseen circumstances where the learner cannot attend, the committee will be rescheduled. The college maintains the right to insist that a learner requested to attend an Academic Integrity/Appeal Committee, must attend the committee sessions. If the learner refuses to attend for his/her own personal reasons, the learner will be advised that failure to attend may result in further action being taken against the learner and/or the committee will continue their investigation in the learner’s absence based on the report presented to them. The Academic Integrity Panel may make a decision and or recommendations on the learner concerned in their absence. The Appeals Committee decision is final.
Comments
0 comments
Article is closed for comments.