Academic Conduct Panel

Overview

The History Department has a formal process for investigating cases of suspected academic misconduct. This page explains how the process works, support available and possible outcomes.

Cases of suspected academic misconduct are identified by markers in the first instance, sometimes with the help of Turnitin softwareLink opens in a new window. The marker may judge that a piece of work counts as poor academic practiceLink opens in a new window, in which case they will mark the work as usual, taking the poor practice into account in their mark and/or feedback.

If marker decides that the case is more serious, they will refer the case to the Academic Conduct Panel, which is made up of staff from the department. Members of the panel examine the case and make an initial judgment about whether it is poor academic practice or academic misconductLink opens in a new window.

If the panel decides it is poor academic practice, the work is returned to the marker, who marks it using their academic judgment. If the panel suspects it is academic misconduct, the student is invited to an interview to discuss the case. Especially in cases of suspected inappropriate use of AI, the interview may include a viva to determine whether the student can demonstrate intellectual ownership of the work submitted. After the interview, the panel then decides on the outcome, which may include a penalty to impose.

Students are updated by email throughout the process. If you have any questions about your case, please email

ACP FlowchartLink opens in a new window

This flowchart explains the normal ACP process. Please note that this flowchart does not include the appeals process or how the department handles repeat cases.

Support

We understand that an ACP referral can be worrying and upsetting, but please remember that this process is intended to support you with your academic work.

We encourage you to discuss this with your personal tutor first of all, to understand any potential issues with your work.

If you find the process impacts your wellbeing, please make the most of support available.

Wellbeing and Support

Please note that mitigating circumstances cannot be formally considered as part of the ACP process. We would encourage you to apply for mitigation separately and to make the panel aware of any reasonable adjustments that might make the interview process more comfortable for you.

Training

There is support available for improving your work. You may find it helpful to revisit the following departmental resources:

Academic Integrity Moodle Course Academic Integrity Referencing and citation

Interviews

Interviews are a normal part of the ACP process. Interviews are an opportunity for you to share your perspective and for the panel to understand how you approached your work.

FAQs

What is the format of the interview?

All ACP interviews take place online, using Microsoft Teams. You will be notified of the interview date and time in advance.

During the interview, you are encouraged to keep your camera on, and you will be required to show your University ID card as proof of identity.

Panel members will ask you questions about your assignment and your writing process. Please have your work ready to look at during the interview.

Who will be at the interview?

There will be two members of the Academic Conduct Panel at your interview. These will be the two panellists who reviewed your work. One will chair the meeting.

If the interview includes a viva, then the marker will also be present to ask questions.

Your personal tutor will be there if available, along with anyone else you have nominated to support you.

There will also be a member of administrative staff present to take minutes.

Only the two ACP members will be involved in making a decision on the case.

What is the purpose of the interview? Can I bring someone to support me?

Yes. You are welcome to bring someone with you in a鈥痵upporting capacity, such as your鈥疨ersonal Tutor, a鈥痜riend, or a鈥痜amily member. Your personal tutor will automatically be invited.

If you would like to invite someone other than your Personal Tutor, please let us know their name and relationship to you in advance. All attendees are expected to follow the 鈥�Academic Integrity Framework Guidance鈥痜or accompanying individuals.

How should I prepare for the interview?

You are welcome to submit a鈥�written statement鈥痑head of the interview if you wish. This is optional and not required, but it can be helpful in explaining your writing process, referencing choices, or anything else relevant to the concerns raised. If you choose to submit a statement, please keep it to one page and send it to鈥�historyacp@warwick.ac.ukLink opens in a new window by鈥�12pm on the day before your interview.

You should also submit any notes or drafts that you want the panel to consider by 12pm on the day before your interview.

What questions will the panel ask?

The panel may ask questions about:

Your notetaking process
How you accessed your sources
Your referencing and citations
Your writing process
Whether you used AI or GenAI for any aspect of the planning or writing process

Do I have to attend the interview?

You are not required to attend the interview, but please note that if you do not attend the meeting, and do not explain your absence, then a judgement will be made in your absence.

We are unable to reschedule the meeting on grounds of preference or inconvenience. However, if you wish to attend the ACP meeting and have an unavoidable commitment, please inform us of the circumstances by 12pm the day before your scheduled interview and we will determine whether alternative arrangements are possible.

Vivas

In some cases, particularly in cases of suspected misuse of GenAI, the ACP will also invite the marker to attend the interview. This is known as an interview with viva.

The marker is there to ask questions as a subject specialist. This helps the panel to determine intellectual ownership. The marker is not involved in deciding the outcome.

Possible Outcomes

There are 4 possible outcomes for ACP cases:

No case to answer Poor academic practice

"Poor academic practice" does not usually suggest that you have attempted to gain an unfair advantage, but rather that you have failed to properly acknowledge your sources.

If the ACP determines that your work is a case of poor academic practice, they will return the work to the marker to mark in line with their academic judgment. Marks will not be deducted, but it may be that your work does not achieve a high mark because of the poor academic practice.

Academic misconduct

"Academic misconductLink opens in a new window" are acts or omissions by a student which give or have the potential to give an unfair advantage in an examination or assessment, or might assist someone else to gain an unfair advantage, or an activity likely to undermine the integrity essential to scholarship and research. (Regulation 11)

Academic misconduct is the intention to obtain an unfair advantage, or knowingly engaging in a behaviour that has the potential to give an unfair advantage, irrespective of whether such advantage is actually obtained. (Regulation 11)

Where an ACP determines that academic misconduct has taken place, the assignment in question will normally receive a mark of 0. This sanction will be reviewed and approved by the Deputy Head of Department (Teaching and Learning) before it is applied.

All assignments will still be reviewed under normal Exam Board Regulations, including the Right to Remedy Failure Policy.Link opens in a new window

Referral to AIP

In certain circumstances, the ACP may decide to refer a case to the central University Academic Integrity Panel (AIP). This could be because the case is particularly complex, or because a student has had multiple cases that the ACP believes requires a more severe sanction.

Students also have the right to request that their case is escalated to the AIP.

AIP and Appeals

An outcome of poor academic practice is academic judgement and cannot be appealed.

Students have the right to appeal an outcome of academic misconduct. Reg. 11 B4.4.

The student may request, within ten University Working Days of being informed by the ACP of the sanction, that the case is considered by an Academic Integrity Panel (AIP). The student must provide evidence to the Head of Department of why they feel the sanction applied is unreasonable and following this, the Head of Department will make a report to the Academic Registrar.

果冻传媒

Department of History