Academic Integrity Rule 2021 for Learners

Under the Rule 12 (2), a student breaches the academic integrity principle if they:

• cheat

• impersonate another person

• engage in plagiarism

• collude with another person

• improperly share material with another person

• contract cheat/improperly engage another person to prepare, or assist in preparing, work for the student

• submit/publish anything that fails to correctly/appropriately acknowledge the work of another person/otherwise improperly appropriating the intellectual property / contribution of another person

• pass off the work of another person as the student’s own work

• improperly recycle work/improperly submit or publish work that is not original

• take a prohibited item into an examination or other assessment venue/ breach the University’s directions in relation to an examination or other assessment

• fabricate/falsify any document, data/other information, or anything else (e.g. intentionally omitting data to obtain a desired result/by falsely representing observations as genuinely held)

• intentionally or recklessly engage in conduct:

o that impedes the progress of research

o that risks corrupting research records/ compromising the integrity of research practices

o that uses research data from another person without appropriate acknowledgement

o that breaches a research protocol approved by a research ethics committee/a statutory licence condition applying to research

• engage in conduct with the intention of gaining/assisting another person to gain, an unethical, dishonest, unfair/unjustified advantage

• engage in conduct/assisting another person to engage in conduct, that is unethical, dishonest/unfair

• engage in any conduct declared to be academic misconduct by the orders

Once the course convenor has decided to hold the review, the student is notified through their ANU email account. The notice of review contains:

• A brief description of conduct to be reviewed (eg. plagiarism, collusion, etc.)
• Materials that will be referred to in the inquiry meeting (eg. Turnitin report, Wattle logs, etc.)
• Time, date and location/Zoom link for the inquiry meeting
• That the student is able to bring a support person with them to the meeting
• The University Support services available to guide students through the process.

If support and/or assistance is needed at any point in time of the process, please contact ANUSA/PARSA/Dean of Students for advice.

If the student attends the review meeting, they can bring a support person and also provide written statements at the meeting. If the student does not want to attend in person, they can provide a written statement to their course convenor. The convenor can then make a decision based on the student’s written statement. If the student does not attend the meeting or provide a written statement, the course convenor makes a decision on the documents and information available to them.

There are three possible outcomes to the review, the student is notified via their ANU email account once a decision has been made.

No Breach

No Breach means that the course convenor concludes that the conduct has not breached the academic integrity principle. This is the end of the process. There will be no record on the student’s record or official transcript.

Poor Academic Practice

This is when the course convenor believes that the conduct is a breach of the academic integrity principle, however the conduct is excusable due to mitigating circumstances (e.g. personal, emotional, health-related circumstances, etc.) or the conduct is unintended, careless, inadvertent or uninformed. The breach is also not of a serious nature nor is it a recurrence.

The course convenor can take certain actions, e.g. require the student to re-submit their assessment, or reduce the student’s mark for the assessment. A full list of possible actions is provided below.

If the student disagrees with the finding or action taken, the student has the right to appeal the outcome and information about this is provided in the outcome letter.

The Poor Academic Practice finding will be noted on the student’s internal record, but not on the official transcript.

Potential Academic Misconduct

If the case is deemed to be serious, the course convenor can refer it to the office of the Registrar through the Office of the Registrar as a Potential Academic Misconduct case.

Note: Course convenors are also able to refer the case straight to the office of the Registrar without holding a review if the case is deemed serious.

The outcome is yet to be finalised if the case has been referred as Potential Academic Misconduct. For the next steps, see 2. Inquiry.

The student receives an email from their course convenor or supervisor, that the case has been referred to the Registrar as potential academic misconduct.

The student is contacted by the Office of the Registrar for confirmation when the case has been referred to an Inquiry Officer. The student is also advised of the name of the Inquiry Officer. In some situations, especially complex or research cases, the case may be referred to an Inquiry Panel instead of a single Inquiry Officer to hold an inquiry hearing.

The Inquiry Officer/Panel first consider(s) whether an inquiry is required. If they consider that the conduct has not breached the academic integrity principle, no inquiry is needed. The student is notified and the process ends here. There will be no record on the student’s record or official transcript.

If an inquiry proceeds, the student is contacted via their ANU email account. The notice of inquiry contains:

• A brief description of conduct to be reviewed (eg. plagiarism, collusion, etc.)
• Materials that will be referred to in the inquiry meeting (eg. Turnitin report, Wattle logs, etc.)
• Time, date and location/Zoom link for the inquiry meeting
• That the student is able to bring a support person with them to the meeting
• The University Support services available.

If the student needs support and/or assistance at any point in time of the process, please contact ANUSA/PARSA/Dean of Students for advice.

If the student attends the inquiry, they are able to bring a support person and also provide written statements at the meeting.

If the student does not want to attend, they are able to provide a written statement to the Inquiry Officer/Panel. The Inquiry Panel considers the materials and makes a recommendation to the Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer can then make a decision based on the recommendation and materials available. If the student does not wish to attend the meeting or provide a written statement, the Inquiry Officer makes a decision based on the documents and information available to them.

There are three possible outcomes to the inquiry. The student is notified via their ANU email account once a decision has been made.

No Breach

No Breach means that the conduct has not breached academic integrity. This is the end of the process. There will be no record on the student’s record or official transcript.

Poor Academic Practice

This finding is only available if the conduct does not occur in a thesis course or a Research program, and the Inquiry Officer believes that the conduct is a breach of the academic integrity principle, however the conduct is excusable due to mitigating circumstances (eg. personal, emotional, health-related circumstances, etc.) or the conduct is unintended, careless, inadvertent or uninformed. The breach is also not of a serious nature nor is it a recurrence.

The Inquiry Officer can take certain actions, e.g. require the student to re-submit their assessment, or reduce the student’s mark for the assessment. A full list of possible actions is provided below.

If the student disagrees with the finding or action taken, the student may submit an appeal against the outcome. Information about how to do this is provided in the outcome letter.

The Poor Academic Practice finding will be noted on the student’s internal record, but not on the official transcript.

Academic Misconduct

This is when the Inquiry Officer believes that the breach of the academic integrity principle is serious and not excusable, it constitutes Academic Misconduct.

The Inquiry Officer can take certain actions, e.g. require the student to re-submit their assessment, or reduce the student’s mark for the course to a fail. A full list of possible actions is provided below.

If the student disagrees with the finding or action taken, the student may submit an appeal against the outcome. Information about this will be provided in the outcome letter.

The Academic Misconduct finding will be noted on the student’s record, but will not appear on the official transcript.

• decide to take no action (Rule 30(2) (a)/ Rule 51(2) (a))
• counsel the student (Rule 30(2) (b)/ Rule 51(2) (b))
• reprimand the student (Rule 30(2) (c)/ Rule 51(2) (c))
• accept an undertaking from the student, including, for example, an undertaking to undertake counselling or academic integrity training (Rule 30(2) (d)/ Rule 51(2) (d))
• require the student to submit material for re-assessment (Rule 30(2) (e)/ Rule 51(2) (e))
• require the student to undertake a further examination or other assessment (Rule 30(2) (f)/ Rule 51(2) (f))
• reduce the student’s mark for the relevant examination or other assessment
• no more than 25% of the mark available for the assessment (Rule 30(2) (g)/ Rule 51(2) (g))
• no more than 10% of the mark available for the assessment for students within their first 48 units of an undergraduate coursework award (Rule 30(3)/ Rule 51(3))
• tell any relevant professional, government or other organisation or agency about the finding and any action taken in relation to it (Rule 30(2) (h)/ Rule 51(2) (h))

• decide to take no action (Rule 52(2) (a)) - reprimand the student (Rule 52(2) (b))
• require the student to submit material for re-assessment and impose conditions on the re-assessment (Rule 52(2) (c))
•  require the student to undertake a further examination or other assessment and impose conditions on the further assessment (Rule 52(2) (d))
• reduce the mark for any examination or other assessment of the student, including to fail (Rule 52(2) (e))
• reduce a course grade of the student for a course, including to fail (Rule 52(2) (f))
• deny the student access to all or any University facilities for no longer than 12 months (Rule 52(2) (g))
• suspend the candidature or enrolment of the student in a program or course for no longer than 12 months (Rule 52(2) (h))
• determine conditions under which the student may attend classes or lessons, use any facility of the University, or otherwise continue the student’s studies or research program (Rule 52(2) (i))
• require the student to apologise, or take the other action the Inquiry Officer considers appropriate, with a view to mitigating the effect of the academic misconduct (Rule 52(2) (j))
• require the student to undertake specified counselling or academic integrity training(Rule 52(2) (k))
• require the student to make specified corrections or revisions to a specified thesis, publication, research finding or other material (Rule 52(2) (l))
• accept an undertaking from the student (Rule 52(2) (m)) - tell any relevant professional, government or other organisation or agency about the finding and any action taken in relation to it (Rule 52(2) (n))

In addition to the above actions, the following actions are also available for a finding of Academic Misconduct if the Inquiry Officer is the Vice Chancellor or their nominee:

• deny the student access to all or any University facilities for a specified period (including a period of longer than 12 months) (Rule 52(3) (a))
• impose on the student a monetary penalty of not more than $500 for each breach of the academic integrity principle to which the finding relates (Rule 52(3) (b))
• if, as a result of the breach of the academic integrity principle, property was damaged or a person incurred expense or suffered a loss or harm—require the student to pay the owner of the property or the person who incurred the expense or suffered the loss or harm, as the case requires, compensation determined, in writing, by the Vice-Chancellor (Rule 52(3) (c))
• exclude the student from the University (Rule 52(3) (d))
• determine that the relevant award for the program the student is or was studying should not be conferred (Rule 52(3) (e))
• revoke an award of the University conferred on the student (Rule 52(3) (f))