• Section 1 - Purpose
• Scope
• Section 2 - Policy 
• Section 3 - Procedure
• Academic integrity information to applicants for admission
• Student training in academic integrity
• Staff training in academic integrity
• Design and conduct of assessment
• Academic integrity monitoring
• Editing of student assessments
• Third-party delivery of courses and subjects
• Reporting breaches of academic integrity
• Confidentiality
• Staff breaches of academic integrity
• Academic integrity investigations
• Section 4 - Guidelines
• Section 5 - Glossary

Section 1 - Purpose

(1) This procedure supports the Academic Integrity Policy by stating detailed requirements in relation to academic integrity.

Scope

(2) This procedure has the same scope as the Academic Integrity Policy.

Section 2 - Policy 

(3) This procedure supports the Academic Integrity Policy.

Section 3 - Procedure

Academic integrity information to applicants for admission

(4) Information provided to admission applicants with their offer of admission will include:

1. a statement of the University’s expectations that they will maintain academic integrity
2. a statement that:
   1. academic integrity monitoring software will be used and students must agree to having their assessment checked with this type of software, and
   2. students must agree to having their assessment added to the database of the software in order to have their assessment marked, and
3. a warning that academic misconduct or research misconduct will be investigated and may be penalised.

Student training in academic integrity

(5) Every student new to the University must complete the online academic integrity subject for students before they can receive access to their grades. Exemptions to this requirement are:

1. students enrolled in StudyLink subjects who will receive information about academic integrity via their subject site 
2. students enrolled in micro-credentials, and
3. students who undertake subjects as part of alternative pathways/study options and where there is no assessment requirement.

(6) Notwithstanding the exemptions above, exemptions from completing the academic integrity subject upon enrolment at the University will not be granted, regardless of prior completion of similar subjects at other institutions. 

(7) The Division of Learning and Teaching will ensure all students complete the academic integrity subject by the following process:

1. Students will be automatically enrolled in the academic integrity subject as part of their first session of enrolment at the University.
   1. This subject will have no points weighting, and no fee will be charged for enrolment
   2. The grading scale for the subject will be SY (Satisfactory)/US (Unsatisfactory)
   3. The student’s result in the subject will not appear on their transcript
2. To gain a SY grade in the subject, a student must achieve at least an 80% score in the academic integrity subject quizzes. 
3. Students who have not passed the academic integrity subject will not be able to view their grades.
4. Once the student has successfully passed the academic integrity subject, if the student is required to re-sit this subject due to an academic misconduct incident, the restrictions listed in (c) will not be applied. 

(8) Any student enrolled in a higher degree by research (HDR), a master’s by coursework with a research component, or an undergraduate coursework subject involving a research activity, must complete the research integrity module.

1. Principal supervisors and Sub Dean (Graduate Studies) will ensure that a HDR candidate’s candidature is not confirmed until they have completed the research integrity module and, if they are new to the University, the academic integrity subject.
2. Course Directors of coursework courses with research components will ensure that students’ completion of the online research integrity module is a condition for approval of their research proposal.
3. Where a coursework subject requires students to undertake a research activity, the subject coordinator will ensure that students have completed the research integrity module before they begin the activity. This may involve setting completion of the module as an unweighted hurdle assessment for the subject.
4. The research integrity module must be recompleted every three years.

Staff training in academic integrity

(9) All academic staff (whether continuing, contract, casual or adjuncts) must satisfactorily complete (score 80% or more) the staff academic integrity subject and research integrity module upon starting work at the University, and every three years after that. 

(10) Professional/general staff who: 

1. support academic governance committees, or any aspect of assessment or learning and teaching, must satisfactorily complete (score 80% or higher) the staff academic integrity subject upon starting in the role, and every three years thereafter
2. support research governance or ethics committees, HDR candidature or supervision, or research by staff, must satisfactorily complete (score 80% or higher) the staff academic integrity subject and research integrity module upon commencing in the role (if not already completed within the previous three years) and every three years thereafter.

(11) Professional/general staff who support academic work or who have dealings with students must satisfactorily complete (score 80% or higher) the academic integrity subject for professional/general staff upon commencing in the role, and every three years thereafter.  

Design and conduct of assessment

(12) Course design teams will include staff with expertise in embedding academic integrity in the curriculum: for example, Educational Designers and Faculty Liaison Librarians.

(13) Course design teams and subject design teams will design major assessment tasks to minimise the risk of breaches of academic integrity. The Division of Learning and Teaching will provide resources and advice on how to do this.

(14) Subject coordinators and subject teaching teams must not re-use assessment tasks in such a way that students who have acquired knowledge of the task from a previous offering of the subject are at an unfair advantage over students encountering the task for the first time. To this end, they must ensure that:

1. assessment questions in subject outlines are changed in each offering of the subject, unless the questions are designed so that a student will not gain an unfair advantage from seeing students’ assessments from previous offerings of the subject, and
2. exam and test questions are varied each time the exam or test is administered in a subject, so that students will not gain an unfair advantage from knowledge of the previous version of the exam or test.

Academic integrity monitoring

(15) All text-based assessments will be submitted electronically via the University’s system for online assessment submission, unless the Associate Dean (Academic) of the teaching faculty approves an exception for a specific assessment or subject.

(16) When submitting an assessment, the student or candidate will complete a declaration:

1. confirming their authorship of the work and that they have not engaged in any form of academic misconduct
2. indicating whether they have submitted it previously for an assessment task
3. agreeing to have their assessment checked with academic monitoring software, and
4. agreeing to have their assessment added to the database of the software in order to have their assessment marked. 

(17) The Higher Degree by Research Procedure requires a similar declaration as part of each HDR thesis.

(18) All text-based assessments and text-based components of HDR theses must be in a format that can be similarity checked.

(19) The University’s online assessment submission system automatically submits assessments to similarity-checking software to check for matches to other texts, including assessments previously submitted by students for the same assessment task, and to help identify plagiarism.

(20) The  Office of Research Services will run each HDR thesis submitted through similarity checking software.

(21) Students will have access to similarity checking software to check their draft assessment work for similarity to other texts, to ensure that they have referenced others’ work correctly before submitting the final version of their assessment.

(22) The Division of Learning and Teaching will provide online resources to help staff and students understand how to use similarity-checking software to check assessment work for similarity, and how to understand the implications of similarity reports.

Editing of student assessments

(23) A student may only enlist the editorial assistance of a professional editor to edit their assessment on the following conditions:

1. In a coursework subject, the subject outline states that the assistance of a professional editor is permitted.
2. In a research component subject for a coursework course, or a higher degree by research thesis, the principal supervisor has approved the use of a professional editor.
3. In either of the cases above:
   1. the editing must be consistent with the Australian Institute of Professional Editors guidelines for thesis editing, and
   2. the editor’s help is acknowledged in the acknowledgements section of the thesis or in the text of the assessment work.

(24) Teaching staff and supervisors of students’ research theses must avoid editing a student’s work to such an extent that they could be considered an unacknowledged co-author and/or the students’ level of skills, knowledge and academic achievement is obscured.

(25) To help students develop their academic writing skills, they may receive feedback on draft assessment work from the University’s support units: this does not constitute editing help.

Third-party delivery of courses and subjects

(26) Where a course or subject is delivered with a partner institution or organisation, there will be the following measures to ensure the academic integrity of the delivery:

1. The partnership agreement will include requirements to ensure the academic integrity of the delivery.
2. The partner must accept that the University’s Academic Integrity Policy applies to partner staff and to students enrolled in the course or subject.
3. The teaching faculty and Student Administration will collaborate with partner staff to ensure a shared understanding of academic integrity in teaching, assessment and exams.
4. The teaching faculty will monitor students’ assessment work for academic integrity breaches.
5. Student Administration will administer exams for partnered deliveries, unless the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) permits an exception. Where the Provost and Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic) permits the partner to administer the exams as an exception, the Student Administration will:
   1. specify requirements for administration of the exams
   2. collaborate with the teaching faculty to monitor the partner’s administration of the exams, and
   3. where possible, exam supervisors will be independent of the partner organisation.
6. The teaching faculty will inform the relevant school, the Faculty Board and Academic Quality and Standards Committee of any concerns about academic integrity in the delivery and how these are being managed.
7. Academic Quality and Standards Committee will:
   1. submit a consolidated annual report of academic integrity in third-party deliveries to the Academic Senate and the University Council, and
   2. inform Academic Senate, which will inform the University Council, of any concerns with the academic integrity of third-party deliveries as the concerns arise, and how the concerns are being managed.

Reporting breaches of academic integrity

(27) Where a staff member believes a student has engaged in academic misconduct, they will report the matter to an appointed officer as defined in the Student Misconduct Rule 2020, by using this form.

(28) Where a student believes another student has engaged in academic or research misconduct they will report it using the following form. 

(29) Where a student or staff member believes a staff member has engaged in academic misconduct they will report it in line with the Complaints Management Policy. 

Confidentiality

(30) Academic integrity allegations must be treated confidentially, and only discussed with, or communicated to:

1. the person alleged to have engaged in academic misconduct
2. those directly involved in investigating and managing the case, and
3. persons from whom the investigator needs to gain information in relation to the allegation.

Staff breaches of academic integrity

(31) Where a staff member is alleged to have engaged in academic misconduct, this will be handled under the following rule or policies, depending on the circumstances:

1. If a staff member is alleged to have engaged in plagiarism in teaching activities, or breached academic integrity in an academic decision about students, it will be handled as per the Complaints Management Policy which may lead to disciplinary action under the Enterprise Agreement. 
2. If the staff member is also a student of the University and is alleged to have engaged in academic misconduct or research misconduct, the matter will be handled under the Student Misconduct Rule 2020, which may lead to disciplinary action under the Enterprise Agreement.

Academic integrity investigations

(32) Each faculty must have an Academic Integrity Officer who will conduct academic misconduct investigations and provide recommendations concerning outcomes and penalties. 

(33) The Academic Integrity Officer or Faculty Operations Team will record, on the University’s case management database, details of each academic misconduct allegation, investigation, outcome and any penalties applied to the student, including where the outcome of an investigation is that the student has engaged in poor academic practice. 

Section 4 - Guidelines

(34) Nil.

Section 5 - Glossary

(35) The procedure uses terms defined in the Academic Integrity Policy.