Acting on academic misconduct

While efforts to promote academic integrity and take preventative actions are effective deterrents, a proportion of students will engage in misconduct. It is critical that we have processes in place to detect misconduct and respond in a fair and transparent way.

How can I detect potential misconduct?

There are a wide variety of indicators of potential misconduct. Some of these, such as Turnitin similarity reports, employ the assistance of automated systems. All depend on the expertise of staff who have access to students and their work and an understanding of the norms and standards of their discipline.

The following are examples of indicators that misconduct may have occurred:

• Results of analysis by purpose-made detector tools such as Turnitin or MOSS
• Submissions that differ from the student’s previous work in terms of quality, language or other aspects indicative of authorship or work that contains information not included in the course or inappropriate for the award level
• The student being unable to discuss the content of their work or the process that was undertaken to produce it
• Unusual information in the file metadata, such as unexpected author names or very short time periods between file creation and completion
• Reporting from within the student body, such as a group being concerned regarding the conduct of a member or cheating occurring in online chat groups.

In all cases, indicators require interpretation. There are no set thresholds, such as a percentage rating on a similarity report, that are conclusive indicators of misconduct. Consideration must include all of the available evidence and the circumstances of the incident.

What do I do if I suspect a student?

Where there are indications of misconduct, it is important that all subsequent steps are managed in line with the University’s student academic integrity policy, the process of investigation, and the workflow used in your faculty or school.

These are designed in line with the principles of procedural fairness to ensure the most appropriate outcome for the student, the community and the University. Please refer to your faculty academic integrity contact for more information about your faculty’s process.

It is important to note the following when observing indicators of misconduct:

• A single indicator, such as high similarity report, is rarely sufficient to establish that an allegation of misconduct should be made; investigations will always need to consider multiple sources of information
• Similarly, a single indicator being inconclusive is not grounds for ceasing investigation; we share an obligation to our students and the University to identify and act on any potential misconduct

Any staff member involved in detecting or investigating breaches of academic integrity is strongly encouraged to undertake the TEQSA masterclass in contract cheating. This is a free course that provides valuable information in identifying and investigating misconduct, and fairness in decision making.