Academic integrity

Academic integrity is an essential element of studying. The university is a signatory to the QAA Academic Integrity Charter (QAA 2020)  which provides a baseline position upon which UK providers, as autonomous institutions, can build their own policies and practices to ensure that every student’s qualification is genuine, verifiable, and respected.  

Assessments are designed for a variety of reasons but should offer students the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge, skills, talent, and hard work in relation to the learning outcomes of the module.  It is all about capability building.  Student capability and armoury development for the world of work and other activities. Consequently, all types of assessments require honesty.  

Assessments are powerful drivers of learning and coupled with tutor feedback are key means through which we engage in processes that support students’ developmental journey, success, and employability while connecting with their own identity, experiences, and cultural capital.   

Academic integrity is a major contributor to the value of the degrees awarded. However, there is a recognition that academic misconduct is a growing problem globally and presents a threat to the reputation of higher education. It takes a wide variety of forms including the use of essay and degree mills, plagiarism, collusion between students and forged or even altered qualification certificates. The UK higher education sector is united in promoting academic integrity and taking decisive action against academic misconduct. 

Students who commit academic misconduct, especially if they deliberately cheat, risk their academic and future careers. The implications, however, go far wider than higher education. It is a societal issue. Graduates could enter the workforce without the necessary skills, knowledge and competencies, with potential public health, safety and organisational performance implications. 

The best way of ensuring academic integrity (and avoiding plagiarism) is to learn and employ the principles of good academic practice and academic literacy. Avoiding plagiarism is not simply a matter of ensuring accurate referencing, or paraphrasing, it is about deploying students’ academic skills to make their work as good as it can be.  

It is widely accepted that students are highly motivated by assessments and yet they do not always take full advantage of the 'feed forward' opportunities that come from using formative assessments.  In the area of avoiding plagiarism, students should be advised of the immense value that can come from participating in formative exercises in this way.

A good assessment strategy reflects the intended learning outcomes of the course overall as well as the individual modules, utilising a range of suitable and manageable assessment and feedback approaches. It also promotes the development of academic literacy in the students.  

Assessment is an important academic process which evaluates a student’s performance and directly informs their progression and academic attainment record. It is essential that all our students experience a fair and inclusive assessment process.  The term inclusive practice is used to describe an approach to teaching that recognises the diversity of London Metropolitan students. It aims to enable all students to access course content, participate in learning activities and demonstrate their knowledge and capabilities at assessment. 

Academic misconduct covers a variety of practices, such as:  

• Plagiarism: copying another person’s ideas or words and presenting them as one’s  own work, without the use of quotation marks and/or references; 
• Self-plagiarism: reproducing parts of previously submitted assignments in another piece of work; 
• Collusion, where a student has supplied material to another student. Both parties will be dealt with in accordance with Academic Misconduct regulations. Students who are involved in 'co-creation' of assessments or group work would be powerful advocates for adherence to the guidelines and the avoidance of plagiarism - in all of its forms.   
• Collaborating with others in the production of a piece of assessed work which is presented as entirely one’s own work; 
• Cheating in an exam (e.g., by taking revision notes into the exam room).  
• Inventing, altering or falsifying the results of experiments or research; 
• Contract cheating:  Where a student engages others to complete work on their behalf, often in return for payment. Any such detected cases, as well as other offences where it is established that work has been completed by third parties, will be dealt with in line with Academic Misconduct regulations. Please be aware that the Academic Misconduct Regulations, can be applied even after an award has been conferred where cases are identified and evidenced, resulting in awards being rescinded. 

For full details of academic misconduct and how allegations are investigated, see the webpage on the University’s Academic Misconduct Regulations and Procedure. 

The University utilises Turnitin and WebLearn for the online submission of coursework. Turnitin is an internet-based application designed to help assess the degree of originality in a piece of written work. Turnitin is fully integrated with WebLearn / Blackboard.   

Turnitin provides evidence of similarity (text matching with other sources) and is NOT the sole means of detecting or confirming possible plagiarism. Similarity cannot be relied on exclusively and requires academic judgment. In addition, the process is a qualitative one: a high similarity level is not by itself enough to constitute misconduct. Large, plagiarised sections tend to be exposed fairly easily but other smaller material may be more difficult to detect.  

In addition to examinations, it is recognised that it is not possible to submit certain types of work to the Turnitin system, for example, artefacts or visual images.

The University allows students to use Turnitin to check their work before submission. The submission links need to be in place at least 6 weeks before the submission deadline.

A viva voce may, exceptionally, be held where it is suspected that academic misconduct has been committed but where no textual evidence can be produced (e.g. in cases where it is suspected that the student has commissioned the work from a third party).  

The purpose of the viva voce is to provide the student with the opportunity to demonstrate that the work is their own, prior to a referral to the Casework Office. Only the piece of work in question will be the focus of the viva voce. 

The relevant Head of Subject must be consulted and approve the use of the viva voce prior to this being set up and the student informed. 

Two members of academic staff (at least one of whom must be a subject specialist) must be present at / conduct the viva voce; this will normally be the marker of the assessment and the Head of Subject or his/her nominee who may include the module leader, course leader or another suitable individual. If the HoSj was a marker, then another member of staff would be the second member of staff present. 

The student may be accompanied by a person of their choice (such as a fellow student, member of staff or Students’ Union representative). Any individual accompanying the student should under no circumstances participate in the Viva.

The Academic regulations acknowledge that students can unintentionally commit academic misconduct through poor academic practice. Therefore, this assessment guidance is to safeguard our assessments, so that students, at the early stages of their academic journey, can develop their proficiency and understanding of academic conventions.  

Mitigating circumstances are often cited, as reasons for poor academic practice or academic misconduct. Staff are encouraged to remind students, through continuous induction, of the resources available to them to help students achieve their best, without resorting to actions that belie our communities values.  

It is acknowledged that there are times when it may be more challenging for students to maintain academic integrity due to stressors and inexperience. However, challenging circumstances, do not warrant circumventing or breaching the communities’ values and the University’s regulations. 

There are other resources and avenues available to students when mitigating circumstances are significantly affecting students’ ability to complete assessments, or fully prepare and plan include: 

• Mitigating circumstances.
• Self-Certification.
• Taking-a-Break.

Creativity in assessment design can help actively discourage plagiarism. Just as examples of these may include:  

• Avoiding repetitive assessment tasks as they may inadvertently encourage plagiarism.  
• Timed released briefs and/or case studies. 
• Utilising an inclusive choice of organisations beyond the traditional Global North exemplars. 
• Consider using real world organisations with real world problems.

Clarifying good performance in every assessment.  To do this we need to : 

• Provide clear definitions of academic requirements before each task.
• Provide explicit assessment criteria and performance level definitions for every module assessed via coursework within 2 weeks of the start of term. 
• Promote dialogue in class on how to go about the assessment, and where possible provide model answers.  
• Explain the rationale of the assessment and feedback techniques.  
• Organise a dedicated workshop with the students where they devise with their tutor some of their own assessment criteria.

Facilitate the development of self-assessment and reflection in learning by : 

• Create online objective tests and quizzes for students to test their own understanding of an area of study. 
• Provide structured opportunities for peers to provide feedback on each other’s work. 
• Involve students in monitoring and reflecting on their own learning through portfolios. 

Where an internal examiner suspects poor academic practice that has the potential to result in academic misconduct, they should communicate to the student their concerns.  

However, it is not good practice to consider potential disciplinary matters on an entirely informal basis without keeping any records, therefore it is advised that this is captured in written feedback to the student. 

See the key resources on the QAA webpage for Academic Integrity.

• Don't just copy: Describe other people's ideas or results (using references) and their importance to your argument in the context of the assessment, rather than simply copying what you've read.  Using cut and paste options tends to encourage copying word for word. 

• Using a range of sources: Discussing ideas from a wide range of sources shows extensive reading and can evidence a student’s ability to formulate their own views based on reading and topic related research.   

• Developing a unique style:  Students should be encouraged to develop their own style of writing during their time at London Metropolitan University. Using the words of another author inevitably stands out from the rest of a student’s work and may lead to possible plagiarism. 

• Using quotation marks: Quoting a short extract from another author's words verbatim, make sure you enclose these words in quotation marks to indicate that it is a direct quote.  Direct quotes should be used sparingly and shouldn't include large amounts of text. They should be used where you are identifying a key idea or highlighting the place where you found the particular idea you are using. Don't forget if you are using someone else's ideas in your work you need to show this by referencing it. 

See this short video by students for students on What is Academic Integrity? 

QAA (2020). Academic Integrity Charter for Higher Education.