A breach of academic integrity occurs when someone does not follow the rules and guidelines related to assessment, research, examinations, or publication. While some breaches of academic integrity are the result of conscious actions by individuals or groups, others may occur unintentionally.

Play the videos to find out about the student and staff perspectives on the right approach to potential breaches of academic integrity.

Continue on to find out about the student and staff perspectives on the right approach to potential breaches of academic integrity.

Determining how to respond to an academic integrity breach is more than providing punitive action. Your institution will likely have policy to follow, and where possible, the aim of any outcome should be for the benefit of the person's learning or wider culture of academic integrity partnership.

Explore the scenarios and reflect on the question. Choose one of the responses provided, and then explore the feedback. If you want to go back and try another scenario, use the 'Main menu' button to return to the list of scenario options.

Go through the scenarios and reflect on the question. Choose one of the responses provided, and then continue on for the feedback.

 Two women are shown at a desk examining a paper together.

Text matching between students

 A person with their back facing the viewer is typing something on a laptop. The screen says 'fifty-per-cent match!'

Text matching software

 A person is holding a bunch of papers and smiling at one of them.

Unexpected improvements

 After reading a student submission, you identify that while the student has cited their sources, there are whole sections of text that directly match work from another student's work. Is this a breach of academic integrity? Yes No If the student was new to studying at this level, or from a different educational background, would the breach be acceptable? Yes No Has the student been enrolled at the institution for more than one session of study? Yes No

Outcome

This is a definite breach of academic integrity. However, while the student has committed a breach, it may be unintentional if they are new to your institution and unfamiliar with requirements. Their learning circumstances or working should be considered before determining outcomes.

Outcome

People who have studied for more than one session should be more familiar with the rules and requirements of academic integrity at your institution. The student has committed a breach, but you should have a discussion to understand why and how the breach occurred.

 A text-matching tool identifies that over 50% of a student's submission matches to other sources. Does this mean that the student has copied over half of their work and therefore plagiarised? Yes No Are the matches small and scattered throughout the report? Yes No Are the matches large and concentrated in sections? Yes No

Outcome

Large scores can be the cumulative total of a lot of small but naturally occurring individual matches to theory descriptions and definitions, disciplinary terms or formulae, or the use of extensive quotations. These will vary from discipline to discipline. Text-matching reports provide information; however, they also require interpretation beyond a reliance on a percentage-based score. Technology reports are only one form of evidence to identify a breach.

Outcome

Large blocks of matches may relate to one or more sources, other people, comprehensive lists of quality references or the re-use of earlier work. There may also be legitimate reasons for large matches such as calculation, vocational or experiment-based assessments. Technology reports provide information, but they also require interpretation from a disciplinary lens and only one form of evidence to identify a breach.

 A student failed your subject in the previous session due to submitting work that contained a large number of grammatical, spelling, expression and referencing errors. The student is taking the subject again this session, and you are amazed at the level of improvement in their work. You are concerned that they may have asked someone else to write the assignment, used generative artificial intelligence (AI) without permission or even paid for this service. However, you also need to consider that they may have actually used your feedback. What do you do? Speak to the student. Ignore the improvement and just grade the assessment.

Outcome

Speaking with the student provides an opportunity to learn how they used the feedback you gave in the previous session and any learning support services. Also consider the student's attendance pattern, use of consultation hours, level of interaction in lectures and tutorials, knowledge of content, access to online learning materials and their performance in other subjects.

Outcome

While the improvement may be genuine, it could also be the result of breaching academic integrity principles. If you do not speak with the student, and ask them questions about the content, or query their process in writing, you may miss cases of contract cheating.

Scenario 1

Question 1:

After reading an essay, you identify that while the student has cited their sources, there are sections of text that directly match work from another student's essay. Is this a breach of academic integrity?

  • Answer 1: Yes [Go to Question 2]
  • Answer 2: No [Go to Feedback 1]

Question 2:

If the person was new to studying at this level, or from a different educational background, would the breach be acceptable?

  • Answer 1: Yes [Go to Feedback 1]
  • Answer 2: No [Go to Question 3]

Question 3:

Has the person been enrolled at the institution for more than one session of study? Or, has the person been with the institution for more than one session?

  • Answer 1: Yes [Go to Feedback 2]
  • Answer 2: No [Go to Feedback 1]

Feedback 1: Outcome

This is a definite breach of academic integrity. However, while the person has committed a breach, it may be unintentional if they are new to your institution and unfamiliar with requirements. Their learning circumstances or working should be considered before determining outcomes.

While the student has committed a breach, it may be unintentional, and their prior learning circumstances should be considered before determining outcomes.

Feedback 2: Outcome

People who have studied for more than one session should be more familiar with the rules and requirements of academic integrity at your institution. The person has committed a breach, but you should have a discussion to understand why and how the breach occurred.

Scenario 2

Question 1:

A text-matching tool identifies over 50% of a persons submission matches to other sources. Does this mean that the person has copied over half of their work and therefore plagiarised?

  • Answer 1: Yes [Go to Question 2]
  • Answer 2: No [Go to Question 2]

Question 2:

Are the matches small and scattered throughout the report?

  • Answer 1: Yes [Go to Feedback 1]
  • Answer 2: No [Go to Question 3]

Question 3:

Are the matches large and concentrated in sections?

  • Answer 1: Yes [Go to Feedback 2]
  • Answer 2: No [Go to Feedback 1]

Feedback 1: Outcome

Large scores can be the cumulative total of a lot of small but naturally occurring individual matches to theory descriptions and definitions, disciplinary terms or formulae, or the use of extensive quotations. These will vary from discipline to discipline. Text-matching reports provide information; however, they also require interpretation beyond a reliance on a percentage-based score. Technology reports are only one form of evidence to identify a breach.

Feedback 2: Outcome

Large blocks of matches may relate to one or more sources, other people, comprehensive lists of quality references or the re-use of earlier work. There may also be legitimate reasons for large matches such as calculation, vocational or experiment-based assessments. Technology reports provide information, but they also require interpretation from a disciplinary lens and only one form of evidence to identify a breach.

Scenario 3

Question:

A student failed your subject in the previous session due to submitting work that did not make sense and contained a large number of grammatical, spelling, expression and referencing errors. The student is taking the subject again this session, and you are amazed at the level of improvement in their work. You are concerned that they may have asked someone else to write the assignment, used generative AI without permission or even paid for this service. However, you also need to consider that they may have actually used your feedback. What do you do?

  • Answer 1: Speak to the student. [Go to Feedback 1]
  • Answer 2: Ignore the improvement and just grade the assessment. [Go to Feedback 2]

Feedback 1: Outcome

Speaking with the student provides an opportunity to ask about how they used the feedback you gave in the previous session and any referrals provided to learning support services. Also consider the student's attendance pattern, use of consultation hours, level of interaction in lectures and tutorials, knowledge of content, access to online learning materials and their performance in other subjects.

Feedback 2: Outcome

While the improvement may be genuine, it could also be the result of breaching academic integrity principles. If you do not speak with the student, and ask them questions about the content, or query their process in writing, you may miss cases of contract cheating.

Identifying academic integrity breaches can be challenging and skills evolve with practice, feedback and reflection. Whatever action you eventually take in response to a potential breach, it should be led by empathy and kindness. The goal of any action should be restorative and with the student's welfare and learning as the priority.