Skip to main content
QUB SU Logo

Academic Offences

This is any act or omission whereby a student can gain an unfair academic advantage. You do not have to have intention to have committed the offence for it to have taken place. Therefore, accidentally forgetting to reference a source or being unaware that you haven’t completed work using the correct academic practices is not usually accepted as an excuse for committing an academic offence.

Before looking to proceed with the academic offences procedure, Schools will conduct an initial review. The Head of School (or nominee) will appoint a member of staff to consider the evidence provided and decide either:

  1. That no academic offence has been committed and no further action will be taken; or
  2. That there is evidence of poor academic practice but not of an academic offence and that the student will be signposted to advice, guidance and additional learning resources; or
  3. That it appears an academic offence may have taken place and that the case requires investigation

There are several different academic offences covered by the University regulations:

  • Cheating: The term ‘cheating’ relates to behaviour that takes place in an examination, class test or laboratory test.
  • Plagiarism: Presenting the words or thoughts of others as your own.
  • Duplication: Using or reusing significant, identical, or nearly identical portions of your own work which has been previously submitted for assessment within the University or another institution. (This is sometimes called self-plagiarism).
  • Copying or permitting copying: Copying another student’s work or permitting another student to copy any of your work which you submit for assessment.
  • Collusion: Working on an assignment with anyone else if that assignment is meant to be done individually.
  • Fabrication: Claiming to have carried out experiments, interviews or any form of research which you have not in fact carried out, or inventing or falsifying data, evidence or experimental results.
  • Contract Cheating: Commissioning or seeking to commission another party (either paid or unpaid) to produce academic work on your behalf.

Academic offences fall within two categories either major or minor offences. Minor offences are committed when any of the offences outlined above are suspected to have taken place on a piece of work worth less than 1/3 of the module. Anything weighted over this will be seen as a major offence. There are other circumstances that would automatically be investigated as a major offence, these are:

  1. Any incidents of research misconduct by an undergraduate or a postgraduate taught student
  2. Any incidents of plagiarism or duplication in unpublished work submitted by a postgraduate research student for assessment (via Annual Progress Review or oral examination).
  3. Any repeat or multiple offences.
  4. Cheating in an examination, class test or laboratory test
  5. Contract cheating

The Process:

  1. The potential academic offence is picked up by the marker of a particular piece of work, either by reviewing a Turnitin report or noticing a similarity between two or more pieces of work submitted.
  2. The marker reports this and the student is subsequently sent an email inviting them to a meeting to discuss the allegation. The student is usually provided with the evidence that has led to this concern being raised at this stage. If not, we encourage students to go back to the School and request this in advance of the meeting.
  3. The student will usually contact SU Advice for advice and support with the allegation.
  4. The student attends the meeting (the meeting with be with a different person or panel depending on if this is a minor or major offence) where they will explain what they believe has gone wrong and their understanding of the offence.
  5. The panel will arrive at a conclusion and the student will be notified of the outcome of the meeting within eight working days.
  6. If the student is unhappy with the outcome, they can submit an appeal to the Academic Offences Committee. If the student is happy then no further action is needed.
  7. If making an appeal, the student submits the correct form to the Appeals and Complaints team within 10 working days of receiving the initial decision.
  8. A Sifting Panel will decide if the student’s case has any merit or not.
  9. If the students appeal is rejected the student will be notified of this and there is no further route of appeal. If accepted it will be referred on to an Academic Offences Committee.
  10. The student will be contacted when a date for the panel meeting has been set and asked to attend the meeting.
  11. The student will attend the meeting and will have the opportunity to outline their grounds for appeal and any mitigation they feel should be considered.
  12. The student will be sent the outcome within eight working days of a decision being made.
  13. If the student remains unhappy then they may appeal to the Academic Offences Appeals Committee (AOAC) under one of the grounds, on the relevant form, within ten working days.
  14. The appeal will face the same Sifting Panel scrutiny and if the case has merit it will be referred on. If not, the appeal will be rejected and that will be the end of the internal process and the student will need to submit a complaint to Northern Ireland Public Service Ombudsman (NIPSO)
  15. If the appeal is accepted the student will be invited to attend a meeting with the AOAC. The student will be given the opportunity to outline their appeal and circumstances to this new Committee and will be sent an outcome within eight working days of a decision being achieved.
  16. The student will receive the outcome and that will be the end of the internal processes. If the student is still unhappy they will need to raise a complaint with NIPSO.

Outcomes available at each stage

School level

Minor offence

  1. A written warning to the student.
  2. Award a mark of zero and allow the student to resubmit for full marks
  3. Award a mark of zero and allow the student to resubmit for a maximum of the pass mark; or
  4. Award a mark of zero and not permit a resubmission.

Major Offence

  1. A written warning to the student.
  2. Award a mark of zero and allow the student to resubmit for full marks
  3. Award a mark of zero and allow the student to resubmit for a maximum of the pass mark;
  4. Award a mark of zero and not permit a resubmission; or
  5. Refer the matter to the Academic Offences Committee.

Academic Offence Committee:

  1. Award a mark of zero and allow the student to resubmit for full marks, or;
  2. Award a mark of zero and allow the student to resubmit for a maximum of the pass mark; or
  3. Award a mark of zero for the components of the modules and not permit the student to resubmit; or
  4. In the case of a postgraduate research student, refer the matter back to the School to provide the student with support and guidance;
  5. In the case of a postgraduate research student, direct that the offending material be removed from the work submitted and that the student carry out such further work as is necessary to replace it;
  6. In the case of a postgraduate research student, recommend to the examiners that no degree be awarded.
  7. Suspend the student; or
  8. Require the student to withdraw from the University.

Academic Offence Appeals Committee:

  1. Uphold the appeal and rescind the penalty imposed by the Academic Offences Committee.
  2. Confirm the penalty imposed by the Academic Offences Committee.
  3. Impose a different penalty from among those set out in the list of penalties open to the Academic Offences Committee. The penalty imposed shall not be more severe than the original penalty imposed.

Things that the investigating officer/panel are likely to ask include:

  • What is your understanding of plagiarism (or any other academic offence you are suspected to have committed)?
  • How do you normally complete your work i.e. do you reference as you go along or at the end?
  • Where did you find this text?
  • Have you ever been shown how to reference or paraphrase?

The main purpose of the meeting is to understand what may have gone wrong and to understand if you were aware of what you were doing.

SU Advice Advisers are allowed to accompany students to meetings but are not permitted to act as a representative or speak on a student’s behalf. Before attending these meetings, it would be beneficial for you to reach out to the Learning Development Service. They provide support with best academic practises such as referencing and paraphrasing. However, support with this is only available to undergraduate students. Postgraduate students should reach out to the Graduate School to find out what support is available to them.

In advance of the meeting you may have been invited to submit a statement outlining your understanding of what may have gone wrong. We are happy to offer guidance on what to include in this before you submit it. You can find guidance here: Writing Your Academic Offence Statement  

Academic
Academic