Policy

To identify and minimise the risk of malpractice by staff or learners.

To respond to any incident of alleged malpractice promptly and objectively.

To standardise and record any investigation of malpractice to ensure openness and fairness.

To impose appropriate penalties and/or sanctions on learners or staff where incidents (or attempted incidents) of malpractice are proven.

To protect the integrity of this centre and of the vocational qualifications.

In order to Achieve this Humanoid Will:

Seek to avoid potential malpractice by using the induction period to inform learners of the centre's policy on malpractice and the penalties for attempted and actual incidents of malpractice.

Ask learners to declare that their work is their own.

Ask learners to acknowledged any sources used.

Conduct an investigation in a form proportionate with the nature of the malpractice allegation. Such an investigation will be supported by the director of operations and all personnel linked to the allegation.

Make the individual fully aware at the earliest opportunity of the nature of the alleged malpractice and of the possible consequences should malpractice be proven.

Give the individual the opportunity to respond to the allegations made.

Inform the individual of the avenues for appealing against any judgment made.

Document all stages of any investigation. Where malpractice is proven, this centre will apply the following penalties / sanctions:

Resubmission of all work within the assignment and where necessary the use of a modified assignment brief.

Automatic failure of the unit. Removal from the qualification.

The following are examples of malpractice by the students. This list is not exhaustive and other instances of malpractice may be considered by this centre at its discretion:

Plagiarism of any nature.

Collusion by working collaboratively with other learners to produce work that is submitted as individual learner work.

Cheating to gain an unfair advantage.

Copying (including the use of technology to aid copying).

Deliberate destruction of another's work.

Fabrication of results or evidence.

The alteration of any results document, including certificates.

False declaration of authenticity in relation to the contents of a portfolio or coursework.

Impersonation by pretending to be someone else in order to produce the work for another or arranging for another to take one's place in an assessment/examination/test.

The following are examples of malpractice by centre staff. This list is not exhaustive and other instances of malpractice may be considered by this centre at its discretion:

Assisting learners in the production of work for assessment, where the support has the potential to influence the outcomes of assessment, for example where the assistance involves centre staff producing work for the learner.

Producing falsified witness statements, for example for evidence the learner has not generated.

Allowing evidence, which is known by the staff member not to be the learner's own, to be included in a learner's assignment/task/portfolio/coursework.

Facilitating and allowing impersonation.

Misusing the conditions for special learner requirements, for example where learners are permitted support, such as an amanuensis, this is permissible up to the point where the support has the potential to influence the outcome of the assessment.

Falsifying records/certificates, for example by alteration, substitution, or by fraud.

Fraudulent certificate claims, that is claiming for a certificate prior to the learner completing all the requirements of assessment.

Failing to keep assessment/examination/test papers secure prior to the assessment/examination/test.