Understanding the Academic Misconduct Panel Process: Principles and Procedures

1. Academic Misconduct Panels Student Governance December 2013 AMP DEC13

2. Purpose • To better understand the AMP process • Consideration of evidence • Reaching a decision • Reporting to the Assessment Board AMP DEC13

3. Underlying Principles • Fairness & Transparency • Consistency in process & penalty • Timeliness • Keeping students informed AMP DEC13

4. Student / University Contract • Student agrees to abide by regulations and be subject to relevant procedures (disciplinary / academic / complaints etc). • University agrees to ensure robust & fair proceedings (to investigate / make findings / impose penalties as appropriate). • University must follow own procedures and public law principles of natural justice. AMP DEC13

5. Principles of Natural Justice. Principles of fairness underpinning public law: • There are two sides to every dispute • All parties are given the opportunity to provide evidence to substantiate their version of the issue / incident • Full disclosure of any allegations and evidence will be made to those parties involved • All parties have the right to be accompanied by a ‘friend’ at each stage of the procedure. • All parties have the right to an unbiased & fair consideration of the matter. AMP DEC13

6. Before the AMP • Suspicion of academic misconduct • Is there a case to answer • Liaise with Faculty Registrar • Evidence If yes then: • Full disclosure of information & evidence to students AMP DEC13

7. Definition of a Friend • LJMU defines a ‘friend’ as a person who accompanies a student to provide support, who is with the student during proceedings. • Students are responsible for making their own arrangements to have an appropriate ‘friend’ in attendance at proceedings. • the friend may ask questions through the Chair of the Panel in order to clarify issues or procedures. AMP DEC13

8. Conducting the AMP • Composition of the Panel • Conflict of interest • Presenting officer • Responsibilities of the chair • Conduct of proceedings • Proceedings must be formally minuted AMP DEC13

9. Analysing the Evidence • Be objective • Challenge inconsistencies • To what extent does the evidence support the allegations? • Is the evidence relevant / hearsay /third party /prejudicial? • If conflicting evidence, which is more credible and why? AMP DEC13

10. Conclusions / findings Standard of proof is civil standard • reasonable belief - balance of probabilities based on the evidence. Not criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt but: • Seriousness of the allegation / potential consequences - weight of evidence The basis for the final decision / recommendation must be clear and explicit. AMP DEC13

11. Penalty tariff • 305 - 349: Mark of 0 for assessment component - student may re-submit if referred • 350 - 479: Mark of 0 for module - student may re-submit at referral • 480 – 524: Mark of 0 no opportunity to resubmit. • 525+: Case referred to Assessment Board Recommend expulsion with alternative exit award as appropriate or recommend expulsion with any award withheld AMP DEC13

12. After the AMP • The AMP report must demonstrate clear reasoning behind decision • Notification to students • Decisions are reported to Assessment Boards • Risks • When do AMPs meet • Unreasonable delay • Academic progress AMP DEC13

13. Post AMP • Application of the penalty • AMP appeals • Reporting to assessment boards • Expulsion procedure AMP DEC13

14. Institutional risks • Reputational damage • May attract public / press attention Costs • Time • Badly managed cases may be more easily challenged • Challenges more likely to proceed • Financial cost incurred in preparing representation for OIA / Courts • Other legal costs / compensation AMP DEC13

15. Questions? AMP DEC13