• Section 1 - Purpose and Context
• Section 2 - Definitions
• What is Academic Misconduct?
• Plagiarism
• Collusion
• Cheating
• Any other academic misconduct
• Section 3 - Policy Statement
• Part A - Rights and Responsibilities
• Responsibilities and Rights of the University and Staff
• Responsibilities and Rights of Students
• Part B - Reporting Allegations of Academic Misconduct in the formal examination period.
• Part C - Procedures for the investigation of suspected Academic Misconduct other than in formal examinations
• Part D - Minor and Substantial Breaches of the Policy
• Minor Breach
• First Minor Breach: Students in their First Session of Study
• First Minor Breach: All other Students
• Substantial Breach
• First Substantial Breach: Students in their First Session of Study
• Substantial Breach: All other Students
• Part E - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the Head of School
• Formalising the Allegation and Meeting the Student
• During the meeting with the Head of School
• Where the Allegations have been Confirmed
• Where the Allegations have been Denied or Penalty Not Accepted
• Part F - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the College Misconduct Committee of the College Board of Studies
• The College Misconduct Committee
• Prior to the Meeting of the College Misconduct Committee
• Highly Sensitive and Personal Information Provided by a Student to the College Misconduct Committee
• During the Meeting of the College Misconduct Committee
• Following the Meeting of the College Misconduct Committee
• Variations to Timeframes
• Part G - Appeals against Determinations made in relation to Academic Misconductby the College Misconduct Committee
• Grounds for Appeals
• Appeals Committee of Academic Senate
• Submitting an Appeal
• Appeals Against Determinations made in relation to Academic Misconduct where the Additional Evidence is Highly Sensitive or Personal in Nature
• During the Meeting of the Appeals Committee
• Following the Meeting of the Appeals Committee
• Section 4 - Procedures
• Section 5 - Guidelines

Section 1 - Purpose and Context

(1) The University expects students to avoid any action or behaviour that may give them an academic advantage to which they are not entitled or which will bring the University's academic processes into disrepute. The University undertakes the responsibility to ensure that students are made aware of accepted academic conventions in their field/s of study and the consequences of failing to follow these conventions. It is the responsibility of students to learn the academic conventions appropriate to their field, including acknowledgement of the intellectual property of others and to become familiar with the policies and procedures regarding all forms of academic misconduct.

(2) The University is committed to academic integrity and good scholarship and supports the rights of a scholar's ownership of their ideas and research - their intellectual property. The authors who have developed knowledge and research deserve the right to have their work acknowledged. Failure to give due acknowledgement is the equivalent of stealing. These procedures apply to students undertaking undergraduate or postgraduate coursework units irrespective of the course involved. Where allegations of academic dishonesty arise in relation to research components of honours or postgraduate courses, the matter will be dealt with under the regulations relating to Misconduct - Student Research Misconduct Policy. If there is any ambiguity as to which policy applies the decision of the Academic Registrar will determine the matter.

(3) Any person who has reason to believe that a student has acted in a manner that constitutes academic misconduct, according to the University's definition below, is to advise in writing according to the appropriate procedures listed below. The allegations will be investigated under the procedures described in this section and if found substantiated, penalties may be imposed.

Section 2 - Definitions

What is Academic Misconduct?

(4) Academic Misconduct may involve one or more of the following.

Plagiarism

(5) Plagiarism involves submitting or presenting work in a unit as if it were the student's own work done expressly for that particular unit when, in fact, it was not. Most commonly, plagiarism exists when:

1. the work submitted or presented was done, in whole or in part, by an individual other than the one submitting or presenting the work;
2. parts of the work are taken from another source without reference to the original author; or
3. the whole work, such as an essay, is copied from another source such as a website or another student's essay.

(6) Acts of plagiarism may occur deliberately or inadvertently.

(7) Inadvertent plagiarism occurs through inappropriate application or use of material without reference to the original source or author. In these instances, it should be clear that the student did not have the intention to deceive. The University views inadvertent plagiarism as an opportunity to educate students about the appropriate academic conventions in their field of study.

(8) Deliberate plagiarism occurs when a student, using material from another source and presenting it as his or her own, has the intention to deceive. The University views a deliberate act of plagiarism as a serious breach of academic standards of behaviour for which severe penalties will be imposed.

Collusion

(9) Collusion includes inciting, assisting, facilitating, concealing or being involved in plagiarism, cheating or other academic misconduct with others.

Cheating

(10) Cheating includes, but is not limited to:

1. dishonest or attempted dishonest conduct during an examination, such as speaking to other candidates or otherwise communicating with them;
2. bringing into the examination room any textbook, notebook, memorandum, other written material or mechanical or electronic device (including mobile phones), or any other item, not authorised by the examiner;
3. writing an examination or part of it, or consulting any person or materials outside the confines of the examination room, without permission to do so;
4. leaving answer papers exposed to view, or persistent attempts to read other students' examination papers; or
5. cheating in take-home examinations, which includes, but is not limited to:
   1. making available notes, papers or answers in connection with the examination (in whatever form) to others without the permission of the relevant lecturer;
   2. receiving answers, notes or papers in connection with the examination (in whatever form) from another student, or another source, without the permission of the relevant lecturer; and
   3. unauthorised collaboration with another person or student in the formulation of an assessable component of work.

Any other academic misconduct

(11) Other academic misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

1. tampering or attempts to tamper with examination scripts, class work, grades or class records;
2. failure to abide by directions of an academic member of staff regarding the individuality of work to be handed in;
3. acquisition, attempted acquisition, possession, or distribution of examination materials or information without the authorisation of the academic member of staff;
4. impersonation of another student in an examination or other class assignment;
5. falsification or fabrication of clinical, practical or laboratory reports; or
6. non-authorised use of tape recording of lectures.

Section 3 - Policy Statement

Part A - Rights and Responsibilities

Responsibilities and Rights of the University and Staff

(12) The University and the Staff have the responsibility to:

1. Ensure staff are aware of the University's policies and procedures regarding academic misconduct and plagiarism;
2. Provide training for academic staff regarding the detection of plagiarism and other academic misconduct, and appropriate ways to deal with academic misconduct;
3. Inform students at the beginning of each period of study of the University's policies and procedures regarding academic misconduct and plagiarism regardless of the student's stage of study;
4. Provide instructions for students on how to avoid plagiarism and collusion.

(13) The University and the Staff have the right to expect that students would avoid any action or behaviour that may give them an academic advantage to which they are not entitled or which will bring the University's academic processes into disrepute.

Responsibilities and Rights of Students

(14) Students have the responsibility to:

1. Read, understand and respect the University's policies and procedures regarding plagiarism, collusion, cheating and other forms of academic misconduct;
2. Acquire the knowledge and skills to ensure that they are able to use the appropriate academic conventions in their field of study;
3. Ensure they give due acknowledgement in work presented for assessment to any research and ideas obtained from others.

(15) Students have the right to:

1. Be made aware of the University's policies and procedures regarding academic misconduct and the penalties that will be imposed for proven academic misconduct;
2. Be made aware of the appropriate academic conventions in their field of study;
3. Respond to allegations of plagiarism, cheating, collusion and other academic misconduct.

Part B - Reporting Allegations of Academic Misconduct in the formal examination period.

(16) Academic misconduct in a formal examination is always considered a substantial breach of the policy, and is therefore dealt with in accordance with clauses 35 - 37, "Substantial Breach".

(17) An allegation of academic misconduct during a formal examination must be reported, in writing on a standard pro-forma, by the Examination Invigilator to the Examinations Manager, who in turn will discuss the report with the relevant Head of School.

(18) Where the Head of School considers that the behaviour of the student may amount to misconduct, and the student acknowledges that they have breached the Student Academic Misconduct Policy, the Head of School will deal with the matter in accordance with the relevant Substantial Breach clauses in this policy. If the student disputes the allegation, the matter will be referred directly to the Misconduct Committee of the College Board of Studies, who will deal with it in accordance with Part F - Allegations of academic misconduct to be considered by the College Misconduct Committee.

Part C - Procedures for the investigation of suspected Academic Misconduct other than in formal examinations

(19) If an academic staff member believes that there is evidence of plagiarism in the work submitted by a student or evidence that cheating, collusion or other academic misconduct has taken place, he or she must first discuss the suspicion with the Unit Co-ordinator or nominee (where applicable) and the Head of Program, or nominee, (in which the unit is located).

(20) The academic staff member, the Head of Program, or nominee, and the Unit Co-ordinator, or nominee, must agree that there are sufficient grounds to support allegations of academic misconduct. This agreement is to occur before any further action is taken.

(21) If it is agreed that the academic misconduct appears to be inadvertent plagiarism, the student should receive advice from the academic staff member and be referred to this policy, the plagiarism guidelines, and to seek help relevant to their needs.

(22) If it is agreed that academic misconduct occurred, and that, in the view of the academic staff member who detected the alleged academic misconduct, the Head of Program, or nominee, and the Unit Co-ordinator, or nominee, this misconduct appears to be deliberate, the student will be requested in writing within ten working days of the incident being brought to the attention of the Head of Program, or nominee, to meet to discuss the matter and determine the nature of the misconduct. This is an informal meeting where the student will be given the opportunity to discuss the matter. There should be a minimum of two staff members present - the academic staff member who detected the alleged academic misconduct and Head of Program or nominee.

(23) At the meeting, the student will be informed of the precise nature of the allegation and given an opportunity to view and comment on the evidence supporting the allegation.

(24) If a student fails to attend the meeting, the matter will be considered in his or her absence.

(25) If, during the meeting or the investigation, it is revealed that more than one student was involved in the alleged academic misconduct (i.e. collusion), the process for the student involved in the current investigation will continue and an investigation of any other students alleged to have colluded in this case will begin.

(26) If there is more than one student involved in the suspected incident of academic misconduct, the cases of all students thought to be involved will be dealt with at the same hearing, but heard separately. The procedures following the initial investigation stage will be determined with regard to the particular involvement and record of previous offences for each individual student.

(27) If, at the end of the meeting, it is agreed that the academic misconduct was inadvertent, the student should be advised to refer to the plagiarism guidelines, and to seek help relevant to their needs.

(28) If, at the end of the meeting, there are grounds to believe that the alleged academic misconduct was deliberate the following procedures will be followed.

(29) Procedures where it has been determined that deliberate academic misconduct has taken place.

(30) The Head of Program, or nominee, should confirm whether the student is in their first session of study and if this is the first breach of the policy. This information can be obtained by designated officers in the School.

Part D - Minor and Substantial Breaches of the Policy

(31) The terms 'minor breach' and 'substantial breach' indicate the University's view of the gravity of the impact of the breach of the Academic Misconduct policy.

Minor Breach

First Minor Breach: Students in their First Session of Study

(32) If the student is in their first session of study and the breach is minor, the student should be instructed about ways to avoid academic misconduct and plagiarism. A warning should be given about the penalties for further breaches.

(33) Subsequent minor breaches in a unit of study in the first session will be dealt with as a minor breach under the section "First Minor Breach: All Other Students".

First Minor Breach: All other Students

(34) If the breach was minor, the student can be given an appropriate mark and the breach noted on the student's record. The level of the grade will be determined by the academic staff member in consultation with the Head of Program, or nominee, and Unit Co-ordinator (where applicable). The student will also be required to seek remedial advice through the School and or the Learning Skills Unit, if appropriate.

(35) Subsequent minor breaches will be dealt with in the same way as a Substantial Breach of the policy.

Substantial Breach

First Substantial Breach: Students in their First Session of Study

(36) If the breach is a serious matter of academic misconduct or a substantial use of plagiarised material, the matter will be referred to the Head of School.

(37) Subsequent Substantial Breaches in the first session of study will be dealt with in the same way as a Substantial Breach: All other Students.

Substantial Breach: All other Students

(38) If the breach was substantial, the matter should be referred to the Head of School. The Head of School will deal with the allegations in accordance with Part E (Allegations of academic misconduct to be considered by the Head of School) or Part F (Allegations of academic misconduct to be considered by the College Misconduct Committee) of this policy.

Part E - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the Head of School

(39) The Head of School will consider all referred allegations of academic misconduct, with the exception of those allegations specified in Part F - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the College Misconduct Committee of these procedures. In those cases, where the Head of School has determined that the matter is sufficiently serious as to be dealt with by the College Misconduct Committee, the Head of School will, within five working days, refer the matter to that Committee for consideration.

(40) Where a student is suspected of academic misconduct in a unit being undertaken in a School other than the student's School of enrolment, the matter should be dealt with by the Head of School offering the unit.

Formalising the Allegation and Meeting the Student

(41) Where a case of academic misconduct has been forwarded to the Head of School, within ten working days of receipt of the allegation, the Head of School will advise the student in writing by certified post of the nature of the allegation and the processes that will follow. The Head of School will arrange to meet with the student within twenty working days to discuss the allegation.

(42) The student may, at this stage, inform the Head of School in writing that the allegation is accepted and choose not to attend the meeting. The Head of School will determine the appropriate penalty (refer to clauses 50-53). The student must be told in writing that if the allegation is agreed as correct and the matter is to be determined by the Head of School then there is no right of appeal. The student will, however, be invited to address the Head of School on the question of penalty and any mitigating circumstances. After the determination is made, the Head of School will advise the student in writing of the penalty to be imposed.

(43) A student who wishes to attend the meeting to discuss the allegation must, within seven working days of the certified posting date of notification of the allegation, confirm their attendance either in writing or by telephone. The Head of School will, at least five working days prior to the date of the meeting, send to the student by certified post a copy of any documentation related to the allegation of misconduct.

(44) Where a student provides a valid reason for being unable to attend, and the School is able to accommodate the student's request, the meeting may be rescheduled.

During the meeting with the Head of School

(45) The Head of School may be assisted by other designated officers of the University. The Academic Registrar (or nominee) is to be party to the meeting, ex-officio, to ensure procedural fairness is achieved and to advise the Head of School.

(46) The student may be assisted at the meeting by a fellow enrolled student, a member of staff or a member of a student association. The person assisting the student may provide the student with advice, but may not act as an advocate nor make direct comment in the meeting without the permission of the Head of School. However, if the Head of School does give permission, the person assisting the student may speak at the meeting.

(47) At the meeting, the allegation will be discussed, and where appropriate, other parties will be invited to present information relevant to the allegation. All parties will have the opportunity to hear all questions and answers. To the maximum extent possible, the meeting will be conducted in a non-adversarial manner and with a minimum of formality. If, at the end of the meeting, the Head of School determines that there is no case to answer, the case will be dismissed. The decision will be recorded in the student's file.

(48) After the procedures referred to in the previous clause are completed, but before any decision is made, the Head of School must inform the student that the student may agree that the allegation is correct. The student must also be told that, if the allegation is agreed as correct and the matter is to be determined by the Head of School, there is no right of appeal. The student will, however, be invited to address the Head of School on the question of penalty and any mitigating circumstances.

Where the Allegations have been Confirmed

(49) If the Head of School determines that the matter may be resolved at this stage, the student's file will be checked for previous recorded breaches.

(50) For a student's first substantial breach of the policy, one or more of the following penalties may be imposed:

1. a warning given and no further action taken;
2. a reprimand given;
3. requiring the student to meet and to apologise formally to the aggrieved party(ies);
4. requiring the student to resubmit an item of work in which misconduct has been detected, after he or she has edited or totally rewritten it, as appropriate, so that it meets the required academic standards;
5. requesting the student to complete a new assessment task (other than a formal examination) where misconduct has been detected in the originally submitted work;
6. downgrading the mark for an item of assessment;
7. downgrading a final grade in a unit;
8. imposing a grade of fail in a unit or units;
9. any combination of the above.

(51) Where appropriate, students will also be encouraged to seek advice through on-campus counselling services.

(52) The Head of School will, within five working days from the date of the decision, notify the student in writing of any penalty to be imposed. The Head of School is responsible for ensuring that any penalty has been applied. The breach will be recorded on the student's file.

(53) For all subsequent substantial breaches of the policy, the matter will be referred to the College Misconduct Committee. The College Misconduct Committee will investigate the matter and determine the penalty to be imposed as detailed in Part F.

Where the Allegations have been Denied or Penalty Not Accepted

(54) In those cases where the student does not accept the penalty to be imposed, and no consensus can be reached, the Head of School will, within five working days, refer the matter to the College Misconduct Committee.

(55) In those cases where the student denies or disputes the allegation, the Head of School will, within five working days, refer the matter to the College Misconduct Committee.

(56) The Head of School will, within five working days from the date on which the matter has been referred to the Misconduct Committee, write to the student by certified post confirming the outcome. A copy of the letter will be sent to the Office of the Academic Registrar for recording on the student's file.

Part F - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the College Misconduct Committee of the College Board of Studies

(57) The College Misconduct Committee will consider allegations of student misconduct where:

1. they relate to cheating in formal examinations and have not been resolved by the Head of School under Part E - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the Head of School of this policy, and are therefore referred by the Head of School;
2. the allegation is considered by the Head of School to be too serious or inappropriate to be resolved under Part E - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the Head of School of this policy;
3. the student does not attend the meeting called by the Head of School under Part E - Allegations of Academic Misconduct to be considered by the Head of School of this policy (except where the student agreed, in writing, with the allegation);
4. the student does not agree that the allegation is correct; or
5. the student does not accept the penalty imposed by the Head of School.

The College Misconduct Committee

(58) The College Misconduct Committee, a Standing Committee of the College Board of Studies comprises:

1. College Board of Studies Chair or nominee (Chair); (Note: the Chair of the Board of Studies may appoint a Deputy Chair, in the event of the unavailability of the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee, subject to the proviso that any particular misconduct case be heard by a committee with a consistent composition throughout.)
2. Academic Registrar (or nominee);
3. Associate Dean (or nominee);
4. One Head of School not involved in the case (or nominee);
5. one student member, selected from the student members of College Board of Studies.

(59) The Director Equity and Diversity or nominee may attend as an observer.

(60) The Chair of the College Board of Studies will be responsible for convening the College Misconduct Committee. No person can be a member of the committee if they have been involved in the matter being considered. Each time the Committee is convened, there should be at least one member of each gender.

(61) A quorum of the Misconduct Committee will be three members, two of whom must be academic.

(62) The members of the College Misconduct Committee will be appointed on a yearly basis.

Prior to the Meeting of the College Misconduct Committee

(63) When an allegation of student misconduct is referred to the College Misconduct Committee, the Chair of the Committee will, within ten working days from the date on which the allegation was received, notify the student in writing of the nature of the allegation. The Chair will outline the processes that will follow, including the date, time and place of the hearing.

(64) Hearings will be held as soon as is practicable but in any case no later than fifteen working days from the certified date of posting of notification of the allegation.

(65) While the matter is being investigated, and until the matter is determined, the student may continue to attend classes and submit work for assessment. If the matter will not be determined before the census date of the next teaching session in which the student intended to enrol, the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee must advise the student so that they may enrol and complete that teaching session.

(66) A student who wishes to attend the hearing must, within ten working days from the certified posting date of the notification of the hearing, confirm their attendance either in writing or by telephone. A student who does not wish to attend the hearing will have the allegation heard in his/her absence, and any written submission from the student will be taken into account at the hearing.

(67) The Chair of the College Misconduct Committee will, at least five working days prior to the date of the hearing, send a copy of the documentation related to the allegation of misconduct to the student by certified post.

(68) The student may be assisted at the hearing by a fellow enrolled student, a member of staff or a member of a student association. The person assisting the student may provide the student with advice, but may not act as an advocate or directly address the Committee without the permission of the Chair of the Committee. If the Chair does give permission, the person assisting the student may address the Committee.

(69) Prior to the commencement of the hearing, the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee is to inform the student of the opportunity of placing before the Committee any relevant facts or information.

(70) At the hearing, the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee will:

1. present details of the allegation to the hearing;
2. invite the student to respond to the allegation; OR
3. as envisioned in clause 57(e), a student has accepted a finding of misconduct but has not accepted a penalty imposed, invite the student to provide grounds for a lesser penalty (but not allow a re-hearing of the allegation)
4. invite officers of the University and invited individuals to present relevant facts and information.

Highly Sensitive and Personal Information Provided by a Student to the College Misconduct Committee

(71) Where a student provides the College Misconduct Committee with information of a highly sensitive or personal nature, the student may submit those details in a sealed envelope clearly marked "confidential". Such material will be treated with the utmost confidentiality and will only be seen by the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee who will decide how the material should be considered.

(72) Where the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee decides that the material should be considered by the College Misconduct Committee, the student will be advised accordingly. The student will be given the option to withdraw material.

(73) Where the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee decides that the material is of such a highly sensitive or personal nature that it should not be considered by the College Misconduct Committee, he/she will make a recommendation as to an appropriate course of action to the Committee for its consideration.

During the Meeting of the College Misconduct Committee

(74) At the hearing, the College Misconduct Committee will not regard written or oral information provided to it as confidential. Persons who supply information to the Committee must understand that the student will see that information and be aware of its source. In exceptional cases, the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee may determine that the identity of the person providing the information may need to remain confidential or the proceedings be conducted in private.

(75) At the conclusion of the hearing, the Chair of the College Misconduct Committee will ask everyone present, with the exception of Committee members, to leave the hearing.

(76) The Committee will then consider all written and oral information presented to it, and reach a determination, including (if relevant) the penalty to be imposed. One or more of the following penalties may be recommended:

1. a warning given and no further action taken;
2. a reprimand given;
3. downgrading the mark for an item of assessment;
4. downgrading a final grade in a unit;
5. imposing a grade of fail in a unit or units;
6. denying the student access to specified University facilities for a specified period;
7. requiring the student to meet and to apologise formally to the aggrieved party(ies);
8. requiring the student to resubmit an item of work in which misconduct has been detected, after he or she has edited or totally rewritten it, as appropriate, so that it meets the required academic standards;
9. requesting the student to complete a new assessment task (other than a formal examination) where misconduct has been detected in the originally submitted work;
10. suspending the student for a period of time no less than six (6) months, but no greater than twelve (12) months;
11. excluding the student for a period of time no less than twelve (12) months, but no greater than twenty-four (24) months;
12. excluding the student permanently;

(77) In imposing any penalty that has enrolment implications, the Committee must specify to which teaching sessions the penalty applies.

(78) If a student is suspended or excluded, the University will not count for credit towards that course any study undertaken at another tertiary institution during the period of suspension or exclusion.

Following the Meeting of the College Misconduct Committee

(79) The Chair of the College Misconduct Committee will, within five working days from the date of the conclusion of the hearing, forward the recommendation to the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Academic) for ratification.

(80) Where a College Misconduct Committee deems the matter to be so serious as to warrant permanent exclusion or expulsion from the University, a recommendation must be made to the Vice-Chancellor who will make the final determination.

(81) The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Academic) (or the Vice-Chancellor where the penalty is permanent exclusion or expulsion) may exercise discretion in ratifying the recommendation of the College Misconduct Committee.

(82) The Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Academic) (or the Vice-Chancellor where the penalty is permanent exclusion or expulsion) will, within five working days from the receipt of the recommendation from the Chair of the Misconduct Committee, will convey their ratification of the Misconduct Committee recommendation to the Academic Registrar. The Academic Registrar will, within no more than 10 working days from the ratification of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic) or Vice-Chancellor, write to the student via certified post advising him/her of the outcome of the hearing, the penalty to be imposed, and of the student's right of appeal to the Appeals Committee of Academic Senate.

Variations to Timeframes

(83) Whilst allegations of academic misconduct are to be considered by the University with due diligence and expedition, the timeframes contained in the policy are indicative and may be affected by a number of factors including availability of committee members. In exceptional circumstances, the timeframes prescribed in the policy may be varied, with the approval of the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Academic) or nominee.

Part G - Appeals against Determinations made in relation to Academic Misconductby the College Misconduct Committee

Grounds for Appeals

(84) A student may appeal to the Appeals Committee against determinations made in relation to academic misconduct on either one or both of the following grounds:

1. evidence exists that a determination made by a College Misconduct Committee was made in breach of procedural fairness; or
2. substantial new evidence relating to the original act of misconduct that was not previously available to the a College Misconduct Committee is now readily available.

(85) Late or non-receipt of official letters from the University will not be accepted as grounds for appeal if the student has not ensured that the University is in receipt of accurate and current contact details.

Appeals Committee of Academic Senate

(86) The Appeals Committee of Academic Senate will comprise:

1. Chair or Deputy Chair of Academic Senate as Chair;
2. Two Chairs of the College Boards of Studies;
3. Academic Registrar or nominee;
4. One student, drawn from the student members of Academic Senate;

(87) The Director Equity and Diversity or nominee may attend as an observer.

(88) The Chair of the Misconduct Committee will be interviewed if appropriate.

(89) Persons who have participated in the assessment of the appellant as a member of the Misconduct Committee will be ineligible to sit as members of the Appeals Committee convened to hear an appeal for that student. The Committee must contain at least one member of each gender.

(90) A quorum of the Appeals Committee will be three members two of whom must be academic.

Submitting an Appeal

(91) Students who wish to appeal against a determination made in relation to academic misconduct must, within fifteen working days from the date on which the official notification of the determination was issued, lodge a written case of appeal with the Executive Officer, Appeals Committee of Academic Senate. Students must clearly state the grounds for appeal as specified in clause (84) of this policy.

(92) The time lines specified in this policy regarding appeals may be varied at the discretion of the Chair of Academic Senate where there are substantive practical reasons requiring a variation. Where a variation is necessary, sufficient notice will be given to all parties, and time lines may be extended or, in exceptional circumstances and with the accused student's consent, reduced.

(93) The Chair or Deputy Chair of Academic Senate may determine that there are no valid grounds for appeal, and therefore the appeal will not be heard.

(94) The Executive Officer will, as soon as is practicable but in any case not later than one month from the date on which the appeal was lodged, convene a hearing of the Appeals Committee.

(95) The Executive Officer will, not later than five working days prior to the date of the hearing, forward a copy of the appeal papers to each member of the Appeals Committee. The Student's copy will be sent by certified post.

(96) The Appeals Committee will, on the hearing of an appeal by a student:

1. allow the appeal if it is of the view that the determination should be set aside on any of the grounds specified in clause (84) of this policy; or
2. dismiss the appeal if it is of the view that the determination should not be set aside on any grounds specified in clause (84) of this policy;

(97) In allowing an appeal by a student, the Appeals Committee may:

1. set aside or vary a determination;
2. consider additional evidence offered by the student, where an appeal is made on the grounds specified in clause (84) of this policy, and reconsider the matter; or
3. vary the penalty imposed.

(98) In dismissing an appeal by a student, the Appeals Committee may vary the penalty imposed.

Appeals Against Determinations made in relation to Academic Misconduct where the Additional Evidence is Highly Sensitive or Personal in Nature

(99) Where a student lodges an appeal to the Appeals Committee, and the additional information provided is of a highly sensitive or personal nature, students may submit those details in a sealed envelope clearly marked "confidential". Such material will be treated with the utmost confidentiality and will be seen only by the Chair of the Appeals Committee, who will decide how the material should be considered.

(100) Where the Chair of the Appeals Committee decides that the material should be considered by the Appeals Committee, the student will be advised that the appeal will be considered in accordance with clauses (102-103) of this policy. The student will be given the option to withdraw material.

(101) Where the Chair of the Appeals Committee decides that the material is of such a highly sensitive or personal nature that it should not be considered by the Appeals Committee, he/she will make a recommendation as to an appropriate course of action to the Committee for its consideration.

During the Meeting of the Appeals Committee

(102) In relation to the hearing of an appeal by a student, the Chair of the Appeals Committee will give an overview of the appeal to the hearing and present the written reasons of the Misconduct Committee. The student will be invited to present a case in person, or in writing (where the student does not attend the hearing). The student may be assisted by an enrolled student, a staff member of the University or a representative from a student association. The person assisting the student may provide the student with advice, but may not act as an advocate nor make direct comment to the meeting without the permission of the Chair of the Appeals Committee. If the Chair does give permission, the person assisting the student may address the Committee.

(103) At the completion of the hearing, everyone present, with the exception of members of the Appeals Committee, will be excused from the hearing to allow the Appeals Committee to reach a recommendation.

Following the Meeting of the Appeals Committee

(104) The Chair of the Appeals Committee will, within five working days from the date of the hearing, forward the recommendation to the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic and Services) for ratification. In cases where the recommendation is permanent exclusion or expulsion the matter will be referred by the Chair of the Appeals Committee to the Vice-Chancellor for final approval.

(105) Where the Vice-Chancellor makes a determination that the student be permanently excluded or expelled, the decision will be reported to the Board of Trustees.

(106) The Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic and Services) or Vice-Chancellor may exercise discretion in ratifying the recommendation of the Appeals Committee. In some instances, the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic and Services) or Vice-Chancellor may determine an outcome which is at variance with the original determination.

(107) On receipt of the determination from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic and Services) or Vice-Chancellor the Academic Registrar will, within five working days from the date on which the recommendation was received, advise the student in writing by certified post of the outcome of the appeal.

(108) The determination of the Deputy Vice Chancellor (Academic and Services) or Vice Chancellor will be final and conclusive.

Section 4 - Procedures

(109) Nil.

Section 5 - Guidelines

(110) Nil.