We know that receiving a notification about Academic Integrity can be both confusing and concerning, hopefully we can advise and guide you through this.
Academic Integrity Formal Discussion
The best way to prepare is to revise your work and understand exactly how you wrote it:
- Where did you get your sources and references?
- How did you quote and reference in the work?
- Why did you answer the questions in the way you did?
- How did you revise / prepare?
It will also help to do the following and we can help you with these steps:
- Read through your TurnitIn report and try to identify where the problem might be.
- Look at the other evidence that you have been given. For example, you might have another students’ work to compare yours to, or you might have Chat GPT evidence to compare your work to, for specific phrases or concerns.
- Look at the Academic Skills and Development webpage to help you understand more about plagiarism and how to avoid it – https://www.surrey.ac.uk/academic-skills-and-development We would strongly advise that you make an appointment with them before your interview to see where you have gone wrong, this will help you explain your work in the interview.
Remember that you have to be honest with the University. Dishonesty could lead to further action such as a disciplinary with the University.
Read the University regulations for Academic Integrity which can be found on the OSCAR web pages here. These Regulations explain the different stages of the process and what the outcomes of the interview can be.
The interview is a discussion, usually via teams, with someone from the module team and an Academic Integrity Officer from the University.
You may also have a secretary taking notes, but sometimes the AIO will take the notes themselves. You can bring the Students Union Advisor who has been supporting you or a friend or someone you trust to the meeting.
The AIO and Module team memebr will ask you a series of questions about your work including your understanding of plagiarism and how you put the work together. If you have drafts or notes, make electronic copies and send to the interviewers so they can see the work. This helps explain how you put the work together. You may be asked the following questions:
- Do you accept or deny the allegations?
- What is your understanding of plagiarism/paraphrasing/collusion?
- How did you produce this work? How did you put this work together?
- Do you know how the errors in your work might have happened?
- If your allegation is collusion, you might be asked how you worked with other students, or how your work came to be so similar
- If your allegation is regarding AI or use of Chat GPT, then you might be asked knowledge based questions on your work, your understanding of the work and learning outcomes of the module.
At the end of the meeting, the AIO will ask you AND the module team member to leave the Teams chat. This gives them time to decide on the outcome.
The decision is made solely by the AIO, the module team member does not make the decision or discuss with the AIO without you present.
Normally, you will be invited back into the chat where they will give you the outcome. In complex collusion cases, or if the schedule is too busy it might take longer but they will let you know this.
Following your Academic Integrity Formal Discussion, academics can reach one of these outcomes:
- NO MISCONDUCT - so your work is marked as normal.
- POOR ACADEMIC PRACTICE - Your work contains areas of poor academic practice but can be marked as normal aside from the areas of poor academic practice – it is likely that you will receive recommendations to seek support with your academic writing alongside this.
Poor Academic Practice means that there are some issues within your work, usually related to citation or references but they are of such a low amount that they don't make a tangible benefit to your work. This is a subjective decision from the AIO and the more of your work you can explain can improve your chances of this outcome.
- ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT - If the AIO decides that your work is a result of academic misconduct (and there is no evidence of special circumstances) you will be given a penalty. If this was the first time you have been found to have committed academic misconduct, there are two potential outcomes:
- in most cases, the assessment will be marked at 0 and the module overall will be capped at the pass mark.
- In exceptional cases, where the volume of academic misconduct is proven to be low, the assessment will be marked at 0 and the module mark is not capped. Either way, if this means that you fail the module overall, you will be given the chance to retake the assessment.
If the AIO decides that your work is a result of academic misconduct and there is valid evidence of special circumstances, you will not be given a penalty. Instead your attempt will be void and you will be given a new attempt in the next assessment window (usually August).
- Referral to an Academic Misconduct Panel (AMP). Cases will only go to an Academic Misconduct Panel if they are of the highest severity cases (such as impersonation or purchasing an essay), if this is your third offense of academic misconduct, or if the case is particularly complex.
If you are being asked to attend an interview, and this is your second or third allegation of academic misconduct, we would strongly advise that you get in touch with our team for more guidance and advice.
Special Circumstances are proven circumstances which indicate that at the time of submission you were unable to make a rational decision in relation to completing or submitting the work.
Special circumstances have to meet a higher threshold than a regular extenuating circumstances and you should discuss with us if you feel you have special circumstance that were impacting you, we can advise on the evidence you would require.
You must have evidence to demonstrate your special circumstances, usually from a medical professional and this evidence should be submitted to the faculty before your meeting.
The evidence must say the dates that you were impacted and, indicate that you were impacted at the time of submission or when producing the work.
If you do not have the evidence for your meeting, you may submit evidence up to 5 University working days after your meeting. Or, you can ask for a postponement if needed however, a postponement may mean that you don’t meet the board of examiners which can impact on your progression in some situations.
If your special circumstances are upheld, then your assessment will be void and you will be given a new attempt. You will find out if your special circumstances are upheld when you get your outcome letter.
The AIO in our meeting are unable to make a decision on special circumstances. If your outcome is academic misconduct, and you have presented special circumstances, then the AIOs will instruct your assessments team to look at your circumstances and evidence and if accepted will determine the penalty applied.
Academic Misconduct Panel
As mentioned, cases will only go to an Academic Misconduct Panel if they are of the highest severity cases (such as impersonation or purchasing an essay), if the case is particularly complex or if this is a third offence. If you have been invited to an Academic Misconduct Panel (AMP), then you should have already been to your interview and know what the issues within your work might be. When you receive your invitation letter, they will also send you the interview notes. You should check that these are an accurate reflection of the interview discussion.
The panel is the second stage of the Academic Misconduct process within the University. You will be emailed a formal invitation to your panel with at least 5 days notice. This will say the time, date, and teams link to the panel and who will be sitting on your panel.
If you are presenting evidence of special circumstances, or any drafts/notes as evidence, these should be submitted to the secretary at least two days before the panel.
The panel is made up of three AIOs (Academic Integrity Officers) and there will also be a secretary to the panel to take notes. The AIOs will ask you similar questions to the interview.
If you have any concerns about the panel membership or see a potential conflict of interest or bias, you should raise this now.
You can be accompanied by a friend or member of the Students’ Union Advice team if you wish.
Below is an outline of what you can expect at your panel, it is very similar to the interview but they may ask you some more in-depth questions about your work:
- The panel will introduce themselves to you, including the secretary to the panel.
- The panel will ask you questions similar to those you were asked in your interview and will be looking to understand how you put your work together or what happened in your examination.
- When the panel has no further questions, you will be asked to wait outside while they discuss your case.
- You will be asked if you have any special circumstances to present to the panel.
- You will then be asked to return to the room once a decision has been made – you will be informed of the outcome verbally on the day.
- Following the panel, you will receive written confirmation of the outcome via your University email address.
You can prepare in a very similar way to the interview – begin by reading the Regulations if you have not already. These can be found here.
You may wish to consider the following, in order to prepare you:
- Read through your TurnitIn report and try to think of where the problem might be
- Look at the Academic Skills and Development webpage to help you understand more about plagiarism and how to avoid it – https://www.surrey.ac.uk/academic-skills-and-development You may wish to make an appointment with them before your interview to see where you have gone wrong
- Look back at sources you used and gather any notes/draft versions you have for the piece of work to be discussed as you may be asked to explain how you produced your work. Having evidence of how you put the work together will help you.
- If you have had ‘special circumstances’ at the time of your submission, you will need to gather evidence for this. The evidence needed is defined in the regulation
- If it helps you feel more confident, you can prepare a statement to read to the panel
Remember that you have to be honest with the University. Dishonesty could lead to further action such as a disciplinary with the University.
The panel can reach the following conclusions:
- There is no case of academic misconduct and so your work is marked as normal.
- Your work contains areas of poor academic practice but can be marked as normal – it is likely that you will receive recommendations to seek support with your academic writing alongside this.
- That the academics decide that your work is a result of academic misconduct and there is no evidence of special circumstances you will be given a penalty. First offense minor cases will usually be awarded zero for the work and module capped at the pass mark, however the system is incremental so if this is a serious offense or a second offense the penalties are more severe. If the case is seen to be of the highest severity, this can include termination of your studies.
- That the academics decide that your work is a result of academic misconduct and there is valid evidence of special circumstances you will not be given a penalty. Instead your attempt will be void and you will be given a new attempt in the next assessment window (usually August).
You can appeal the outcome of an Academic Integrity Interview or an Academic Misconduct Panel, if you have valid grounds to do so. If you’d like to know more about this, please email us so that we can give you the best information for your circumstances.
Other Questions
You will receive a minimum of 5 university working days notice from day you receive the official invitation to your Academic Integrity Formal Discussion or Academic Misconduct Panel to the meeting taking place.
If you require a postponement on this meeting and have valid reasons for it that you can evidence then you may be able to request this.
In the meeting will be you, an Academic Integrity Officer (AIO) and someone from the module team, usually your module leader.
The meeting will happen over TEAMS, unless you specifically request it to be in person.
You can also have a supporter, this can be a friend or family member or an SU representative, this will be if you have come to us for support and we have then gone through the process and concerns with you and then are able to attend.
We recommend coming to us in advance as we understand the process and so if we attend with you we can ensure that the processes are completed fairly.
Whoever comes with you cannot play lawyer, you have to answer the questions yourself, so whoever you go with do make sure you are prepared to speak.
To have someone attend with you, you will just need to reply to the invitation email you received and let them know who to send the TEAMS invitation to.
If you receive an outcome of academic misconduct this will stay on your record within the university for the purpose of any further academic misconduct cases.
However this will not come up in your record outside of university, beyond having a failed module / capped 2nd attempt.
If you have issues with the AIO or module leader due to be in your Academic Integrity Formal Discussion or Misconduct Panel that you feel would mean the process will be unfair, then you must respond to the invitation email you recieved as soon as possible to explain this and request alternative staff involved.
The aim of the process is to be fair and so if you do not feel this is possible they can make this change with enough warning.
For all VISA concerns we suggest talking to the International Student Advice Team here
On its own a misconduct outcome of academic misconduct should not impact your VISA status, unless the outcome impacts your university registration i.e you received a termination in an Academic Misconduct Panel.
If you are concerned do mention this when discussing this with your Union advisor in advance.
A lot of case that come through this process are not because of intentional cheating but mistakes made in a stressful assessment period.
The AIO and module leader will look to understand and be empathetic in the meeting, but the university regulations do not allow for exceptions to be made based on whether it was accidental or intentional.
So accidental or not the best thing is to be very prepared to show how much of your work was your own and how you made it.
This process is the same for all students, irrelevant of level of study or the practical differences in study.