Swansea University

2. Examination Conditions

Academic Misconduct in examination conditions (this list is not exhaustive).

It is academic misconduct to:

  • introduce into an examination room any unauthorised form of material such as a book, manuscript, data or loose papers, information obtained via an electronic device or any source of unauthorised information;
  • copy from, or communicate with, any other person in the examination room, except as authorised by an invigilator;
  • communicate electronically with any other person during an examination;
  • be in possession of any electronic device capable of communicating with other devices or other people during an examination;
  • impersonate an examination candidate, or allow oneself to be impersonated;
  • present evidence of special circumstances to examination boards which is false, or falsified, or which in any way misleads or could mislead examination boards;
  • present an examination script as one’s own work when the script includes material produced by unauthorised means.
2.1

Academic Misconduct in the Examination Room

An invigilator who considers, or suspects, that a candidate is engaging in academic misconduct shall inform such a candidate, preferably in the presence of a witness, that the circumstances will be reported. The candidate will, however, be allowed to continue the examination and any subsequent examination(s) without prejudice to any decision which may be taken. Failure to inform the candidate that the circumstances will be reported shall not, however, prejudice subsequent proceedings.

Where appropriate, the invigilator shall confiscate and retain evidence relating to any alleged unfair examination practice, so that it is available to any subsequent investigation. The invigilator shall as soon as possible report the circumstances, verbally in the first instance and thereafter in writing, to the Examinations Officer who shall in turn notify the College's Academic Integrity Officer and the Director of Academic Integrity.

In cases where a student has written on their person, the invigilator may contact the Examinations Office and request that a member of staff from the College attend the examination and confirm whether the writing is relevant to the subject/examination. Where possible a photograph of the evidence may also be taken.

2.2

Academic Misconduct in In-class Tests

In the case of an unseen written test which contributes to the final module result, which is conducted under the aegis of the College, the invigilator should report the case to the College's Academic Integrity Officer in the first instance, who in turn shall report the case to the Director of Academic Integrity.

2.3

Unauthorised Electronic Devices in the Examination venue

In the case of a student being found in possession of any electronic device capable of storing or displaying data, including mobile phones, smart watches or any other portable technology, which is not permitted in the rubric of the examination paper and which has not been used or where there is no evidence that it has been used, the offence shall be considered as a breach of examination regulations only. The invigilator shall as soon as possible report the circumstances, verbally in the first instance and thereafter in writing, to the Examinations Officer who shall in turn notify the Director of Academic Integrity.

The Director of Academic Integrity shall interview the student and draw their attention to examination regulations. The Director of Academic Integrity shall then decide whether to issue a penalty (see below).

In order to ensure consistency in the application of penalties the University provides guidance on penalties in the Code of Practice on Academic Misconduct.

The penalty for a first breach of examination regulations shall be:

  • the issue of a written reprimand to the candidate, a record of the reprimand should be kept.

In cases of a second breach the penalty shall normally be:

  • the cancellation of the candidate's marks for the whole examination paper.

Such students will have the rightto request a final review of the outcome in accordance with the University’s Final Review procedures. The Director of Academic Integrity may also decide not to issue a penalty but to refer the case to a Committee of Enquiry in accordance with regulation 2.6.

Where there is suspicion/evidence that the electronic device may have been used, e.g. witnessed by the invigilator, such cases should be referred to the Director of Academic Integrity who will determine whether a prima facie case of academic misconduct has been established (see 2.5).

2.4

Suspected Academic Misconduct Detected During or Subsequent to the Marking Period (Examination cases)

An internal or external examiner who, whether in the course of the marking period or subsequently, considers or suspects that a candidate has engaged in academic misconduct, shall report the matter in writing to the College's Academic Integrity Officer as soon as possible. He/she shall retain any relevant evidence and shall forthwith report the matter in writing to the Director of Academic Integrity who will determine whether a prima facie case of academic misconduct has been established (see 2.5).

2.5

Further actions to be taken by the Director of Academic Integrity

On receipt of a report concerning an allegation of academic misconduct, the Director of Academic Integrity shall determine whether, in the light of all the circumstances, a prima facie case of academic misconduct has been established. 

The Director of Academic Integrity may deal with the allegation in accordance with 2.3 above, where he/she considers that there has been a breach of examination regulations.

If it is decided that no further action against the candidate shall be taken, the College's Academic Integrity Officer or the Examination Officer shall, where appropriate, inform the candidate in writing that the matter is closed.

If satisfied that a prima facie case of academic misconduct exists, the Director of Academic Integrity shall report the case in writing to the Director of Academic Services and shall send to the Director of Academic Services copies of any relevant supporting evidence. The procedure shown shall then operate as described.

Where an allegation concerns a joint case involving a student from ICWS on a non-integrated programme together with a Swansea University student and/or an ICWS student on an integrated programme e.g. communicating in an examination etc, the case shall be dealt with by the Director of Academic Integrity who shall determine whether, in light of all the circumstances, a prima facie case exists.  Cases concerning ICWS students on non-integrated programmes only, shall be dealt with by ICWS.

2.6

The candidate shall be informed, in writing, by Academic Services of the allegation and that a Committee of Enquiry will be constituted to consider the case.