Plagiarism, Collusion and the Fabrication of Data
2011-12 ALL COHORTS
PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND THE FABRICATION OF DATA:
GUIDELINES FOR STAFF AND STUDENTS
Please note that this document is for guidance purposes only and the University’s formal policy, arrangements and procedures are contained in the document ‘Policy for Dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data’; therefore, the Policy document takes precedence over these Guidelines
WHAT ARE PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND FABRICATION OF DATA?
The definitions below apply to all types of work submitted by students, including, for example, written work, diagrams, designs, charts, musical compositions and pictures:
Plagiarismoccurs when a student misrepresents, as his/her own work, the work, written or otherwise, of any other person (including another student) or of any institution. Examples of forms of plagiarism include:
- the verbatim (word for word) copying of another’s work without appropriate and correctly presented acknowledgement;
- the close paraphrasing of another’s work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation, without appropriate and correctly presented acknowledgement;
- unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another’s work;
- the deliberate and detailed presentation of another’s concept as one’s own.
When plagiarism is suspected it should fall into one of two categories:
Minor Plagiarism – this is defined as a small amount of paraphrasing, quotation or use of diagrams, charts etc. without adequate citation. Minor plagiarism may result from poor scholarship (i.e. when a student, through inexperience or carelessness, fails to reference appropriately or adequately identify the source of the material which they use).
Major Plagiarism – this isdefined as:
- extensive paraphrasing or quoting without proper citation of the source;
- lifting directly from a text or other academic source without reference;
(Where material is taken directly from a text or other source the cited material should be demarcated with quotation marks or in some other accepted way and the source should be cited.)
- the use of essays (or parts thereof) from essay banks, either downloaded from the internet or obtained from other sources;
- presenting another’s designs or concepts as one’s own;
- continued instances of what was initially regarded as minor plagiarism despite warnings having been given to the student concerned.
Collusionoccurs when, unless with official approval (e.g. in the case of group projects), two or more students consciously collaborate in the preparation and production of work which is ultimately submitted by each in an identical, or substantially similar, form and/or is represented by each to be the product of his or her individual efforts. Collusion also occurs where there is unauthorised co-operation between a student and another person in the preparation and production of work which is presented as the student’s own.
Fabrication of Data
Embellishment of data – this occurs when a small amount of data is enhanced or exaggerated in ordertoemphasise data which has been obtained by legitimate means.
Fabrication of data – this occurs when a student creates and presents an extensive amount or significantpiece of data in order to conceal a paucity of legitimate data; or wholly fabricates a set of data in the absence of legitimate data.
THE PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND THE FABRICATION OF DATA
PART A – GUIDELINES FOR STAFF
1.EXAMINER[1] – WHAT TO DO IF YOU SUSPECT PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION OR FABRICATION OF DATA
1.1Evidence – ifyou suspect plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data in a student’s work, you should ensure that it is evidenced and documented in order to be able to proceed further.
1.2Category of offence – having collated evidence of the suspected offence, you should determine whether it falls into the category of minor plagiarism, embellishment of data, major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, in accordance with the definitions above.
1.3Minor plagiarism/embellishment of data - if you have determined that the offence is minor plagiarism or embellishment of data you should follow the procedure detailed in section 2 below.
1.4Major plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data – if you have determined that the offence is major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data you should follow the procedure detailed in section 3 below.
Notes:
1.5Copying another student’s work – if you suspect that one or more students have copied the work of another student in any form without his/her knowledge, this should be recorded as minor or major plagiarism (as appropriate) and any resulting warning or penalty (as applicable) should apply only to the student(s) that copied the work.
1.6A student has allowed another student to copy his/her work – if you suspect this, it should be recorded as collusion committed by all the students involved.
2.EXAMINER – PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH MINOR PLAGIARISM OR EMBELLISHMENT OF DATA
2.1Check the student’s records – if you have evidenced and documented a suspected offence in a student’s work and determined that it is minor plagiarism or embellishment of data, you should ensure the student’s records are checked for any previous cases of plagiarism (minor or major), collusion, or embellishment or fabrication of data.
2.2Issue a warning – if the student’s records show no previous offence has been recorded, or if a single offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data has been recorded, then you should issue a written warning to the student (see Appendices1 and 2 to these Guidelines for templates that can be used for this purpose).
2.3Record the offence and inform the Assessment Officer[2] – having issued a warning in accordance with 2.2 above, you should place a note on the student’s records, including their records in SPIDER[3], detailing the nature of the offence and the action taken. You should also inform the Assessment Officer for the department which owns the module of the offence committed and the action taken.
2.4Penalty – under these Guidelines (and the University’s Policy for Dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data)there is no penalty applied for a student’s first or second offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data. You should use your academic judgement in determining an appropriate mark for the assessment, in accordance with the relevant marking criteria and taking into account, as appropriate, matters such as the quality/accuracy of the referencing and citations, the quality of data presented, etc.
Notes:
2.5Previous offences noted on the student’s records – if you find that the student’s records show two previous warnings for minor plagiarism or embellishment of data, or if their record shows that the student has previously committed an offence of major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, then you should instigate the procedure detailed in section 3 below.
2.6Counting the warnings given – a second warning for minor plagiarism/embellishment of data cannot be counted as such and should be disregarded if a student has not yet received the first warning, as the student will not have had an opportunity to take heed of the warning and improve their work. Similarly a third warning, (which would lead to the procedures used for major plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data) would not count as a third warning and should be disregarded if the student had not received the second warning; again the student will not have had the opportunity to improve their work.This is intended to cover situations where assessments are completed and marked within a short period of time. For this section to apply it needs to be clear that the student has not received the earlier warning.
3.EXAMINER – PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION OR FABRICATION OF DATA
3.1Report the offence to the Assessment Officer – if you have evidenced and documented a suspected offence in a student’s work and determined that it is major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data, or you find previous offences noted in their records as detailed in 2.5 above, you should report the offence to the Assessment Officer for the student’s department.
3.2Investigate the offence –the Assessment Officer will investigate the offence and will invite you to provide your evidence and reasons for making the allegation and will invite the student(s) to provide an explanation of the circumstances for the plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data. The student(s) must be afforded the opportunity to make any representations that they may wish to make. If this involves a face-to-face meeting between you, the Assessment Officer and the student(s), then they will be entitled to be accompanied by another member of the University, e.g. a fellow student. (A template for notifying a student of an alleged offence is at Appendix 3 to these Guidelines.)
3.3Report your conclusions to the Board of Examiners – if the Assessment Officer conclude that major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data has taken place, the Assessment Officer must provide a report to the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners, detailing his/her findings, the circumstances of the alleged offence, the investigation undertaken and the representations made by the student(s). A copy of this must also be made available to the student(s). Neither the Assessment Officer nor the Examiner can take part in the decision taken by the Board of Examiners.
Notes:
3.4See section 2.6 above which explains that students must be informed that a case of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data has been found, before the procedure for another case can be instigated.
4.THE CHAIR AND THE BOARD OF EXAMINERS – DEALING WITH MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION AND FABRICATION OF DATA
4.1The report from the Assessment Officer – when the Chair of the relevant Board of Examiners receives the report described in 3.3 above, s/he should consult with the other members of the Board to determine whether the findings of the Assessment Officer are appropriate and acceptable.
4.2Check other work submitted by the student(s) – if the Chair and the Board are satisfied with the findings detailed in the report, the Board should arrange for other work submitted by the student(s) for assessment to be scrutinised for other instances of plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data. Further scrutiny of work should not be done in cases of major plagiarism that have arisen as a result of an accumulation of acts of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data. The Board of Examiners can only scrutinise other work by the student that is from the year of study in which the major plagiarism/collusion/fabrication of data occurred; the Board cannot review work from a previous year (or years) of study which the student has already passed.
4.3Recording the offence – the Board of Examiners should ensure that the minutes of the Board’s meeting accurately record the decision making process and is responsible for ensuring the decision is noted in the students’ record, including their records on SPIDER. The Board should then apply the penalties as detailed in section 5 below.
5.PENALTIES FOR MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION, FABRICATION OF DATA
5.1Awarding a mark of zero – if the Board of Examiners finds that a student has committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data they should award a mark of zero for the assessment. If two or more students are found to have colluded in producing a piece of assessed work, then each student should be given a mark of zero for the assessment. If the mark of zero is to be applied to a postgraduate taught dissertation or project, the Board shall also whether the student can re-submit a revised and corrected version of the dissertation or project, or whether the student must complete and submit a whole new dissertation or project.
5.2Termination of studies – if the Board of Examiners finds that a student on a taughtpostgraduate programme has committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data in respect of their dissertation or project, and in the opinion of the Board it is of a serious nature or extensive in scale, the Board may decide that the student’s studies be terminated, even if it is their first offence.
5.3Failure to satisfy the requirements of the programme – if a student is found to have committed major plagiarism, collusion or fabrication of data on a third occasion, namely three offences of the same type or any combination of major plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data, the Board of Examiners shall determine that the student has failed to satisfy the requirements of the programme. In such circumstances, the Board should also determine whether or not any award is to be made to the student.
6.PROCEDURE IN RELATION TO RESEARCH DEGREES
The policy for dealing with plagiarism, collusion and fabrication of data in research degrees is addressed in a separate policy document.
7.GENERAL ADVICE
The following general points about plagiarism should be noted.
7.1Plagiarism is not always a deliberate act. For example, inexperienced students might not properly reference information that has been obtained from another source, without any deliberate intent to deceive.
7.2Some students, particularly international students, might come from academic backgrounds where plagiarism (as we know it) is not considered wrong and can even be considered a mark of respect to the original author. Some students for whom English is a second language may not feel sufficiently confident to assimilate and represent the views of the original author and so lift wording directly from the text. Sometimes students can plagiarise without being aware that they are quoting another source. For example, students may repeat ideas from a textbook or a lecture without even being aware that they are doing so, and so do not reference the source. Such circumstances would not be regarded as an excuse for more experienced students who are suspected of plagiarism.
7.3Early advice on the nature of plagiarism and training in citation and referencing is important to help students avoid committing plagiarism. ‘Plagiarism – A Good Practice Guide’ by Jude Carroll and Jon Appleton[4] identifies a number of recommendations for good practice that may help lessen the number of instances of plagiarism.
8.WHAT YOU CAN DO
Taking the following actions may help staff combat plagiarism and collusion:
8.1Change assessments regularly – if you usethe same essay titles regularly or set the same case studies or practical, this increases the opportunity for students to plagiarise the work of others.
8.2Review learning outcomes – you should review the learning outcomes of the module/programme so that students are required to demonstrate analysis, evaluation and synthesis rather than simply knowledge and understanding. If students are required to demonstrate their own thoughts and ideas, they will find it more difficult to plagiarise the ideas of others.
8.3Citation and referencing skills – it is helpful if you can add citation and referencing skills to the list of learning outcomes of some modules. This is particularly useful in the early stages of a student’s academic career, in order to help them to understand plagiarism and how to avoid it.
8.4Record keeping – it is useful to develop a system for keeping records of instances of plagiarism and collusion in relation to individual assessments or modules in order to monitor whether it is particularly prevalent in certain areas of the syllabus, and whether particular strategies and initiatives are effective in combating the problem.
8.5Plagiarism detection software – there are various software packages available that can help to detect instances of plagiarism. Departments should consider the appropriateness of using such software and the assessments to which it can be applied. However, if you are using this type of software, academic judgement must still be exercised in order to determine whether an offence of minor or major plagiarism has been committed.
9.RESPONSIBILITIES
9.1Prompt investigation – if an offence is suspected in relation to work submitted by a student, in the interest of helping students to avoid continued acts of plagiarism, collusion, fabrication of data, cases should be investigated as promptly as possible.
9.2Student declaration – all departments[5]should require students, when submitting work for summative assessment, to provide either a signed hard-copy declaration or an equivalent acknowledgement where electronic submission is used, to confirm that they have not plagiarised material, nor have they fabricated any of the data nor have they colluded in producing the work. Appendix 4 to these Guidelines may be used for this purpose, but departments may use their own procedures/forms to obtain the necessary declaration. Where anonymous marking of assessments is carried out, departments should establish procedures for the declarations to be separated from the work to be assessed before being passed to the marker(s).
9.3Fitness to practise – for some vocational and/or professional programmes there may be requirements for students to meet specified standards in respect of their fitness to practise in the relevant vocation or profession. Where a finding of plagiarism, collusion and/or fabrication of data against a student may call into question the student’s fitness to practise, this must be clearly stated in the programme information provided to students.
PART B – GUIDELINES FOR STUDENTS
[Please note that these Guidelines apply to undergraduate and postgraduate taught provision only; there is a separate policy document for postgraduate research programmes.]
10.MINOR PLAGIARISM, EMBELLISHMENT OF DATA
10.1You receive a warning – Appendices1 and 2 to these Guidelines shows suggested templates for a warning that will be issued to you if an examiner[6] finds that you have committed an offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data, in accordance with the definitions of these terms above.
10.2What will happen if you receive a warning? – You will not receive a penalty for your first or second offence of minor plagiarism or embellishment of data under the procedures outlined in these Guidelines or detailed in the University’s Policy for Dealing with Plagiarism, Collusion and Fabrication of Data. However, in committing these offences the overall quality of the relevant assessment is likely to be adversely affected and this could be reflected in the mark awarded. The fact that minor plagiarism or embellishment of data has been found in your work and that you have been issued with a warning will be noted in your student records, including your SPIDER records.
10.3What happens if you get a third warning? – If you commit minor plagiarism/embellishment of data for a third time the procedure for major plagiarism, collusion, embellishment of data will be instigated; see section 11 below.
11.MAJOR PLAGIARISM, COLLUSION OR FABRICATION OF DATA