School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
Plagiarism Pack
Using the Template
This template is designed as a communication and support tool for Academic and SES
colleagues. It provides useful links to procedural documents and university approved letter
templates.
Text in black represents University template relating to Cheating, Plagiarism or Fabricated
Coursework and Malpractice in University Examinations and Assessment. Schools or
Faculties wishing to adopt alternative definitions (which may extend beyond but must
encompass the key points and wording of the University’s definitions) should submit their
wording to the Office for approval by the Committee on Applications. Otherwise the
University’s definitions will apply.
Text in pink represents suggestions and prompts which can be reworded, replaced or
deleted by the School as appropriate to the discipline.
L Reid, J Walkley, N Wildman (ACIFMT)
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
Contents
1.
Overview - Dealing with Suspected Plagiarism and Academic Malpractice .................... 2
2.
Academic Integrity Role Descriptions ............................................................................. 3
3.
Academic Integrity Responsibilities ................................................................................ 4
4.
Agenda template ............................................................................................................ 6
5.
Minutes of meeting template .......................................................................................... 7
6.
University Approved Letters - a description of letter templates available ........................ 9
7.
Useful web links procedure, penalties etc .................................................................... 10
8.
Appendices
………………………………………………………………………………... 11
1
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
1.
1.1
Overview - Dealing with Suspected Plagiarism and Academic Malpractice
Possible case of Plagiarism or Malpractice raised by the Module Leader.
1.2
Module Leader reports to the Academic Integrity Officer and relevant SES Support. After
discussion/consideration, decision made to progress to a formal investigation, or informal reaction (feedback to
student) or no case to pursue. If case pursued then the SES Support will ascertain if this is a first or second
offence by asking the student’s Parent School (if not the same) and checking the School/Faculty spreadsheet
or equivalent system on [insert local pathway here].
1.3
The School to assemble case and give the student not less than 3 working days’ notice in writing: of
the allegations; of the details of all piece(s) of work that will be discussed; a copy of the work marked-up
together with the evidence which the student will retain after the School meeting; of the date of the School
investigation meeting. See guidance at 2.3 of cpffm procedure
1.4
The panel membership is normally made up of three academic staff but can go ahead with two; Head
of School or nominee (usually AIO), Marker or nominee e.g. panel member from nominated group, Tutor
closely associated with work in question e.g. module leader or programme manager. Minuted by a member of
School who has an understanding of the cpffm procedure. Schools should take account of diversity concerns
and, where appropriate, make the necessary provision e.g. for a female staff member to be included.
1.5a
First Offence (minor)
If the student admits plagiarism/malpractice the
penalty is decided by the panel in accordance with
Taught Student Policies and Procedures. In
addition to the penalty imposed the student is also
required to complete the university Academic
Integrity Tutorial and Test. For details of paperwork
to be sent to student see guidance at 2.3.3 of
cpffm_procedure. The outcome is to be reported to
relevant internal exam committee. SES staff to
update School internal system for recording &
tracking cases.
1.5b
Serious Offence, Second Offence or First
Offence Contested.
If the panel concludes that such an offence has
been committed the case should be referred to
Student Cases Team with a proposed penalty or
with no proposed penalty in which case Student
Cases decides the penalty to be applied. For details
of paper work to be sent to the student and for
details on forwarding cases to Student Cases Team
see guidance at 2.3.5 of cpffm_procedure. SES staff
to update School internal system for recording &
tracking cases.
1.6.
Details of the case will be recorded by the SES Support. All paperwork to be simultaneously copied to
the student’s Parent School (if not the same), the Student Cases Team and the student file. See guidance at
2.3.3 & 2.3.5 cpffm_procedure. Details of the case and any penalty will be collated for audit of consistency of
practice. School to update Penalties Database (the database is held in a secure area on Sharepoint. Please
contact Secretariat for access).
1.7.
All plagiarism cases will be recorded in the minutes at the relevant examination committee meeting.
The mark for the component which is plagiarised must not be released for on-going plagiarism cases until the
investigation has run its course; other component marks can be released as normal. A resit charge should be
levied.
1.8.
The School will contact the student to advise when all penalties have been expunged. SES Support to
update internal system for recording and tracking cases, and notify Parent School (if not the same). If the
student fails to expunge the penalty refer to cpffm_penalties and the Student Cases Team.
2
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
2.
Academic Integrity Role Descriptions
2.1 Role Description – Academic Integrity Officer
“The Academic Integrity Officer is a nominated member of academic staff who is responsible
for ensuring consistency within the School in implementing plagiarism procedures and
practice, and investigating suspected cases of plagiarism. The aim is to ensure equitable
treatment of students. The role also involves plagiarism education, such as raising staff and
student awareness of plagiarism issues.” (from the 2013-14 CoPA).
AIO – School Level
Principal duties of the Academic Integrity Officer are:







Overseeing the investigation of suspected cases of academic malpractice in all taught
students within the School/Faculty, including involvement in any University-led
investigations where appropriate.
Ensuring consistent procedures and practice are implemented across the School and that
these are in-line with University procedures.
Working closely with Tutors to raise awareness of academic malpractice issues.
Actively promoting the use of Turnitin within the School/Faculty and developing standard
practices for the identification of academic malpractice in consultation with the AI network.
Promoting and sharing good practice for the identification of academic malpractice and
allocation of penalties in concordance with other Schools (via the AI network).
Encouraging and promoting the completion of the online academic integrity quiz among
all new students entering taught programmes.
Providing input and feedback about the content of the academic integrity quiz via the AI
network.
Administrative Support for AIO
Principal duties of the administrative support for Academic Integrity are:





Deputising for the Academic Integrity Officer in minuting meetings and attending
committees and other events where appropriate.
To gain a full understanding of the academic integrity processes in the School and
University and to support the Academic Integrity Officer by organising meetings for
students and staff, preparing the paperwork, and where appropriate, ensuring that the
academic integrity processes are followed through correctly.
To ensure all documentation is appropriately stored (including official letters, emails and
detailed evidence of case) and is made accessible to relevant members of staff for all
cases of academic malpractice.
To support other academic/teaching staff with queries relating to academic malpractice,
and attempting to solve problems when and where they arise if possible.
To provide general administrative support for relevant academic integrity meetings.
3
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
3.
Academic Integrity Responsibilities
3.1 Academic Responsibilities

Contacting their Academic Integrity Officer and notifying the relevant SES Support when
a case of potential plagiarism is identified.

To mark up the work, and identify the evidence, and to mark that up.

Suspected cases should be processed urgently in order to help mitigate whilst an
investigation is pending. The AIO or nominee must make contact with the student prior
to the investigation. This will be in the form of the covering template email provided by
the Student Cases Team which clearly advises the student that the work is under
investigation and that a mark exists, however whilst the work is under investigation the
student is to carry on with other work and the investigation will be addressed in due
course. The intention is for this email to accompany the official letter to ALL students.

Reviewing the paperwork and attending the hearing. Contributing to the panel*
discussion in light of student’s testimony and of any penalty imposed (following Student
Cases Team guidelines). Addressing all the allegations faced by the student &
permitting the student an opportunity to justify the work and to offer any mitigation.

The AIO to advise students that it is the student’s responsibility if they decide to submit
in fewer weeks and recognise that this might reduce the amount of time they might have
had available to produce the work and that this may impact on other work to be
completed.

To mark resubmitted work and notify the SES Support Staff of the mark.
*The panel will be composed of the Head of School or nominee and normally at least two
other members of School academic staff, including those tutors most closely associated with
the work in question. See agenda template (pg 6) for further details.
3.2 SES Support Responsibilities

Liaising with the Academic Integrity Officer and module leader to arrange the plagiarism
hearings (dates/times/venues).

Corresponding with the student:
o Give the student not less than 3 working days’ notice in writing: of the allegations; of
the details of all piece(s) of work that will be discussed; a copy of the work marked-up
together with the evidence which the student will retain after the School meeting; the
date of the School investigation meeting. See guidance at 2.3.1 of cpffm_procedure.
See university approved template letters which can be found here
https://workspace.leeds.ac.uk/sites/secretariat (contact secretariat for access to this
secure area).
o Save the above in the electronic file on XX: drive at: [Insert location here]

Ask Parent School (if not the same) if there have been any other offences in order to
determine whether the allegation under investigation would constitute a first offence.
4
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY

Check School/Faculty spreadsheet or equivalent system on XX: drive at: [Insert location
here] to ascertain if a first or second offence.

Providing the paperwork for the hearings (e.g. Copies of original work marked up with
evidence/Turnitin report and letters/emails to student available on XX: drive at: [Insert
location here], plus list of penalties).

Taking the minutes of the meeting and typing up for the record, (see templates on XX:
drive). If the SES Support is not available another member of the School who has an
understanding of the cpffm procedure may take the minutes.

Advise student in writing of outcome. See university approved templates.

Recording the decision and progress of the student towards expunging it on either the
Faculty/School Master spreadsheet or equivalent system.

Recording the case on the relevant module spreadsheet and reporting at exam board.

Sending copies of relevant documentation no later than 14 days after the School
meeting and simultaneously copied to both the student’s Parent School and to the
Student Cases Team with the Cheating and Plagiarism ProForma located on the
Student Cases Web page or by clicking cpffm_pro_forma. See guidance at 2.3.3 and
2.3.5 of the cpffm_procedure .
e.g. for first offences copy of minutes and penalty letter only unless offence denied or
second offence when copy of all paperwork required.
Updating relevant spreadsheets (modular and Faculty/School) when marks for
resubmitted work are received.

Update Penalties Database (the database is held in a secure area on Sharepoint.
Please contact Secretariat for access). The Student Cases Team will produce the
annual report from this database.

Notifying student and Parent School when penalties have been successfully expunged.
See university approved templates.

Liaising with the Student Cases Team where a second /serious offence has occurred.
5
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
4. Agenda template
To ensure that all School investigations are conducted consistently, the following agenda for
the meeting with the student has been adopted. The agenda is altered accordingly for
academic malpractice cases, and where multiple students are involved.
University of Leeds
School of XXXXXXXX
Plagiarism Investigation Meeting – XXXXXXX 2015
Present:
Name – Head of School or nominee (usually Academic Integrity Officer)
Name – Marker or nominee e.g. panel member from nominated group
Name – Tutor closely associated with work in question e.g module
leader or programme manager
Name – Minute taker (member of School who has an understanding of
cpffm_procedure)
Student under investigation: XXXXXXXXXXX (Student ID:XXXXXXX)
Course:
XXXXXXXXXXX
Module:
XXXX XXXXX
1. Panel introduced; supporters asked to identify themselves
2. Panel explains that notes taken will be summarised and a copy sent to the
student along with the panel recommendations within 14 working days of the
meeting.
3. Student asked to confirm that they understand why the meeting has been called.
4. Student asked to confirm that they have received a copy of the marked up
assignment and confirm it is his/hers.
5. Student asked to describe plagiarism training received
6. Student asked to confirm academic integrity form signed
7. Chair explains Turnitin report and areas of interest
8. Student asked to explain the alleged plagiarism
9. Panel questions student
10. Student asked to accept / deny offence of plagiarism
11. Student asked if any other circumstances should be considered
12. Student leaves meeting
13. Panel decides outcome / penalties etc
14. Student returns to meeting
15. Chair informs student of outcome, penalty, requirements (work / test), right to
appeal, letter / minutes to be sent
16. Meeting concluded
6
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
5.
Minutes of meeting template
The text below is a suggested outline and guide that covers all key points in the agenda.
University of Leeds
School of XXXXXXXX
Plagiarism Investigation Meeting – XXXXXXX 2015
Present:
Name – Head of School or nominee (usually Academic Integrity Officer)
Name – Marker or nominee e.g. panel member from nominated group
Name – Tutor closely associated with work in question e.g module leader or
programme manager
Name – Minute Taker (member of School who has an understanding of
cpffm_procedure)
Student under investigation: XXXXXXXXXXX (Student ID:XXXXXXX)
Course:
XXXXXXXXXXX
Module:
XXXX XXXXX
Notes of the Interview
The meeting was convened to explore issues of plagiarism in the coursework produced by Miss
XXXX for Module Code and was held under the provisions of the University for addressing
allegations of cheating, plagiarism, fraudulent and/or fabricated coursework and academic
malpractice.
Dr XXXX introduced the members of the panel to Miss XXXX. The supporter was asked to identify
themselves for the record and advised of their role in the proceedings. Dr XXXX explained that
notes would be taken during the meeting; a copy of the notes would be forwarded to Miss XXXX
within the next 10-14 working days.
Dr XXXX asked if Miss XXXX understood why the meeting had been called. Miss XXXX replied that
she did.
Dr XXXX checked with Miss XXXX that the submitted assignment was hers.
Miss XXXX explained that she had undertaken the plagiarism quiz and had received some training
in the lectures and tutorials, and was aware of the Code of Practice on Assessment and
programme/PG/UG handbook.
Dr XXXX confirmed that Miss XXXX had received a copy of the assessment that she had submitted
which had been marked to show the extent of the suspected plagiarism. Dr XXXX gave the definition
of plagiarism as contained in the Taught Student Guide 2015/16; also showed Miss XXXX a copy of
the plagiarism definition that all students are shown at the start of the programme.
Dr XXXX reminded Miss XXXX of the content of the academic integrity form that she signed at the
beginning of her degree programme.
Dr XXXX asked Miss XXXX if she understood the Turnitin report. Miss XXXX replied that she did.
Dr XXXX then explained that, when Miss XXXX’s essay was routinely run through the Turnitin
detection software, the report came back with a high overall similarity index of XXX% for module
Module Code, 33% for module Module Code and XXX%for module Module Code, highlighting sections
of text taken verbatim from other sources. The marker had raised their concern with the Chair and
an investigation had been instigated. Dr XXXX asked why this might have occurred. Miss XXXX
7
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
explained that ……………………. Dr XXXX asked Miss XXXX to accept or deny the offence of
plagiarism. Miss XXXX accepted/denied the offence.
Dr XXXX asked whether there were any other factors affecting Miss XXXX. Miss XXXX responded
that……………………………..
Miss XXXX was asked to leave the room, for the Panel to discuss the outcome.
The Panel acknowledged that Miss XXXX had admitted to plagiarism. The Panel further noted that
this was the student’s first reported offence. The Panel members agreed that there was no reason to
doubt the explanation given by Miss XXXX.
It was agreed that the student should have been fully aware of the University of Leeds procedures
and regulations.
Miss XXXX returned before the panel and was informed that she would not be expelled from the
University as this was her first offence, although if she were to offend again, this would be a very
serious matter. The Chair then explained that the case would now be closed at School level and that
the Director of Student Education and the Parent School would be forwarded all relevant
documentation regarding the investigation.
Miss XXXX was informed that the penalty for the plagiarism would be that she would receive a
Written Warning and would be asked to write a new piece of work, based on a new title. The work
must be written in her own words and be a satisfactory attempt*. Miss XXXX will also be required to
complete the University plagiarism test.
Miss XXXX was informed of the Outcome, as:
Module Code - A mark of 0 (Zero) for the plagiarised element (essay); to resubmit a new essay
for 2nd attempt at pass standard (40), for a maximum module mark of XXX,
Module Code – A mark of 0 (Zero) for the plagiarised element (essay); to resubmit a new essay
for 2nd attempt at pass standard (40), for a maximum module mark of XXX,
Module Code - A mark of 0 (Zero) for the plagiarised element (essay); to resubmit a new essay
for 2nd attempt at pass standard (40), for a maximum module mark of XXX,
Resubmission Dates: XXXXX
Complete the penalty exercise which can be found at:
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/vle/students/assess/academicintegrity/
The Panel strongly recommends the student to:


To access Skills@library
Seek Academic Supervision
Miss XXXX was informed that in accordance with the procedures she would receive a copy of the
report from the meeting together with a letter confirming the penalties within 10-14 working days.
These would be copied to the Student Cases Team for recording in her file and to her Parent
School. Any subsequent offence, following investigation in the School, would have to be reported to
the University (Student Cases Team) where her place in the University would be in question.
The Chair thanked Miss XXXX for attending the meeting and for her help with the investigation.
*A piece of work which is entirely the students own work and free from plagiarised material. It is a serious
attempt in that it addresses the questions set and demonstrates an attempt to address the learning
outcomes.
8
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
6.
University Approved Letters - a description of letter templates available
Listed below is a brief description of each of the University approved letter templates.
6.1
LETTER 1 – Call for meeting (evidence)
Letter inviting the student to a meeting to address the concerns of the Examiners following the
submission of the student’s work for assessment. - Where tangible evidence is available.
6.2
LETTER 2 – Call to interview (no evidence)
Letter inviting the student to a meeting to address the concerns of the Examiners following the
submission of the student’s work for assessment. - Where no tangible evidence is available
(e.g. where it is felt that the work is at a level of ability that the student has not demonstrated in
other submissions, class etc).
6.3
LETTER 3 – Admitted First Offence – MAIN PENALTY LETTER
The School/Department Investigation Panel must use this letter when issuing a penalty
following an admitted first offence (except where the offence is serious/egregious/aggravated.)
6.4
LETTER 4 – Denied first offence. Potential First Offence
Student denies that the submission contains material that is not his/her own and without the
need for any further investigation at School level the Panel is able to conclude that the work is
plagiarised, in whole or in part of that there has been collusion in accordance with the
published definition. Case is to be referred to the Student Cases team.
6.5
LETTER 5 – Serious first offence referred to CoA
Admitted first offence but the Panel concluded that the offence is serious (because of its scale)
and in their view the offence warrants a penalty beyond that which the School can impose.
6.6
LETTER 6 – Admitted egregious or aggravated referred to CoA
Admitted first offence but the Panel concluded that the offence is egregious or aggravated
(e.g. Work or part thereof that is stolen, obtained by deceit or fraud, bought (especially from a
commercial source), or commissioned from a third party or where the content has been
manipulated to avoid detection) and the Procedure requires that case be referred to the
Committee on Applications for final determination where the student’s place in the University is
in question.
6.7
LETTER 7 – Second Offence referred to CoA
The procedure requires that case be referred to the Committee on Applications for final
determination where the student’s place in the University is in question.
6.8
LETTER 8 – Denied Offence – Not Guilty
The panel concluded that the student is not guilty of the offence and no further action will be
taken.
9
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
7.
Useful web links procedure, penalties etc
7.1
CPFFM Procedure
The procedure, managed by the Student Cases team within the Secretariat, includes details of
penalties, the role of the Committee on Applications, the appeals process can be located here
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/documents/cpffm_procedure.pdf
7.2
CPFFM Penalties
The range of penalties for students who have plagiarised in a University assessment or have
submitted fraudulent or fabricated coursework can be located here
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/documents/cpffm_penalties.pdf
7.3
CPFFM Pro Forma
The form to be used by Schools to report any cases can be located here
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/documents/cpffm_pro_forma.doc
7.4
Standard declarations of academic integrity
The standard declarations of academic integrity to be signed at Registration and on
submission of coursework can be located here
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/documents/academic_integrity.pdf
7.5
Examples of malpractice in University assessments
A (non-exhaustive) list of examples of malpractice in University assessments can be located
here
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/documents/malpractice_assessments.pdf
7.6
University Approved Letter Templates
These letters are accessible by University Staff only and are located in a restricted area on the
Secretariat website. https://workspace.leeds.ac.uk/sites/secretariat
7.7
Contact details for the Student Cases Team
The Secretariat Level 11, E C Stoner Building, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT
Tel: 0113 343 1276
Fax: 0113 343 3925
Email: [email protected]
Web site: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/student_cases.html
10
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
Appendix 1.
UG Programmes - Return of marks at the end of session.


Marks are uploaded to Banner and released to Programmes &
Assessment Team. Returning marks of 0H/0G for any plagiarism cases
that have been dealt with prior to the May/June.
Module marks are verified and approved at the May/June (UG)
examination meeting and signed by the examinations officer/external
examiners.
Plagiarism Identified but not yet interviewed/resolved.
Honest fails.



The UG student
applies for and
undertakes a ‘resit’
in August.
The Centre applies
the relevant charge.





The mark for the piece of work under investigation
should be withheld until the investigation has run its
course. There is no mark for that component; other
component marks may be released.
Schools to use the ‘I’ suffix (for India) to mean
‘Incomplete’.
AIO must make contact with the student via the email
template. Suspected cases should be processed
urgently in order to help mitigate anxiety whilst an
investigation is pending.
In a situation where plagiarism is identified and penalty
applied the original mark with the I suffix should be
amended and a module mark of ‘0H’ is returned post
May/June exam boards.
The student applies for and undertakes a ‘resit’ in
August.
The Centre applies the relevant charge.
Sept Exam Boards


All UG module marks (resits) are verified and approved at the Sep examination meetings and signed off by the examinations
officers/external examiners.
Schools upload the ‘final mark’ to Banner with annotation ‘G’ or ‘H’ and release to Programme & Assessment Team.
11
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
PGT Programmes - Return of marks at the end of session.
Worked submitted prior to June



June Exam Boards
Marks received at PGT examination meeting.
Provisional mark released or results verified and approved.
Return 0G/0H for ‘resolved’ plagiarism cases that were considered prior to June at
this point.
Plagiarism identified but not yet resolved.


Honest fails.

The PGT student
applies for and
undertakes a ‘resit’ in
August.
The Centre applies the
relevant charge.





The mark for the piece of work under investigation
should be withheld until the investigation has run its
course. There is no mark for that component; other
component marks may be released.
Schools to use the ‘I’ suffix (for India) to mean
‘Incomplete’.
AIO must make contact with the student via the email
template. Suspected cases should be processed
urgently in order to help mitigate anxiety whilst an
investigation is pending.
In a situation where plagiarism is identified for cases
undertaken after June and a penalty applied, the
existing mark with an ‘I’ suffix should be amended to a
module mark of ‘0H’ and returned.
The student applies for and undertakes a ‘resit’ in
August.
The Centre applies the relevant charge.
Sept/Oct Exam Boards


All PGT module marks (resits) are verified and approved at the Sept/Oct examination meetings and signed off by the
examinations officers/external examiners.
Schools upload the ‘final mark’ to Banner with annotation ‘G’ or ‘H’ and release to Programme & Assessment Team.
12
School/Institute of XXZXX
Faculty of YYYY
PGT Programmes - Return of marks at the end of session.
Worked submitted after June Examination Boards
e.g. Dissertations, Long Projects.
Suspected
Plagiarism
YES
NO
Plagiarism.



The mark for the piece of work under
investigation should be withheld until the
investigation has run its course. There is no
mark for that component; other component
marks may be released.
Schools to use the ‘I’ suffix (for India) to
mean ‘Incomplete’.
AIO must make contact with the student via
the email template. Suspected cases should
be processed urgently in order to help
mitigate anxiety whilst an investigation is
pending.
Sept/Oct Exam Boards 2015/16

All PGT module marks are verified and approved at the Sept/Oct examination meetings and signed off by the examinations
officers/external examiners.
Honest fails.


Plagiarism.
The PGT student
applies for and
undertakes a ‘resit’ in
the following year.
The Centre applies the
relevant charge.



In a situation where plagiarism is identified and penalty
applied a module mark of ‘0H’ is returned at this point.
The student applies for and undertakes a ‘resit’ in the
following year.
The Centre applies the relevant charge.
Sept/Oct Exam Boards 2016/17


All PGT module marks are verified and approved at the Sept/Oct examination meetings and signed off by the examinations
officers/external examiners.
Schools upload the ‘final mark’ to Banner with annotation ‘G’ or ‘H’ and release to Programme & Assessment Team.
13