Plagiarism procedures
1 / 9

Plagiarism Procedures - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Plagiarism Procedures. Principles of the Revised Arrangements. A framework based upon a series of stages Greater control of process by the department Individual members of staff taking action when there is an allegation of plagiarism at early stages

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Plagiarism Procedures' - madge

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

Principles of the revised arrangements
Principles of the Revised Arrangements

  • A framework based upon a series of stages

  • Greater control of process by the department

  • Individual members of staff taking action when there is an allegation of plagiarism at early stages

  • Provision for a progressive approach in terms of actions and penalties

  • Greater link between the procedures and the University’s plagiarism policy

  • Continued emphasis on the promotion of fairness

  • Emphasis on record keeping

Principal changes compared with previous arrangements
Principal Changes Compared with Previous Arrangements

  • Removal of distinction between minor and major plagiarism

  • Emphasis on supporting and educating students in academic skills in the earlier stages

  • Emphasis on departmental and programme role in investigating allegations of plagiarism

  • Special arrangements for first year undergraduate students

  • A move from automatically holding panels

Principal changes compared with previous arrangements1
Principal Changes Compared with Previous Arrangements

  • Greater flexibility in the application of penalties at the departmental and faculty stage

  • Removal of recourse to Plagiarism Review Panel - student would make representations solely through the Academic Appeals process

  • Removal of “Student Declaration Form” at the end of a plagiarism process – this is not a declaration that there is no plagiarism in a piece of work

  • Removal of the requirement to offer a preliminary meeting

A staged approach
A Staged Approach

  • A four -staged approach to investigation and imposition of penalties

  • No matter where students were in their studies, the investigation would be undertaken in sequence

  • If a student in the third year of the undergraduate programme faced allegations of plagiarism for the first time, Stage 1 would apply

  • The stages entail a progressive increase in the penalties

  • Option of a referral from Stages 1 and 2 to a Faculty Panel where there is a prima facie case of gross misconduct

Stage 0 first year undergraduate
Stage 0 – First Year Undergraduate

  • Applies only to the first year of the undergraduate programme or below

  • Special provision for providing advice without the application of penalties

  • Intention is to explore with the student the nature of the alleged plagiarism and how it came about

  • Advice normally be provided by the person marking the work – but process controlled by programme/scheme director

  • Applicable on two occasions

Stage 1 module level
Stage 1 – Module Level

  • Investigation at the module level

  • Instigated by programme director

  • Investigation carried out by one academic; tutors from other departments within faculty may occasionally be engaged

  • Although the primary purpose is disciplinary, there will be some emphasis on providing support, so

  • ... application of penalties and support for the student

  • Applies irrespective of level of study – includes taught masters, but not research degrees

  • Finding might be to refer to a Faculty Panel

Stage 2 departmental level
Stage 2 – Departmental Level

  • Instigated by head of department

  • Investigation by two academics, but with option of three members of staff depending on the nature of the plagiarism and the circumstances

  • Investigate allegations, and where substantiated determine the appropriate punishment and recommend further remedial measures

Stage 3 faculty level
Stage 3 – Faculty Level

  • Investigation undertaken by a panel of three

  • Normally undertaken when previous interventions at Stage 1 and Stage 2 failed to prevent further breaches

  • Reviews gross misconduct

  • Harsher penalties likely to be imposed, including recommendation the student be required to withdraw from the programme

  • Once at Stage 3, further breeches investigated at Stage 3

  • Engagement of Registry