Student Academic Misconduct Procedure

For matters occurring on or before 31/12/2025, refer to the previous version of this document here.

Intent

This Procedure outlines James Cook University’s (JCU; the University) management of allegations of academic misconduct by students to maintain the academic and research integrity and standing of the University. Academic and Research integrity expectations are referenced in the Student Code of Conduct, Examinations Procedures for Students, Learning Outcomes and Assessment Policy, Coursework Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure and the Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.

This Procedure addresses Higher Education Standards Framework (HESF) Standards 2.4, 4.1.1, 5.2 and 6.2.1.j.

Scope

This Procedure applies to all students (including Higher Degree by Research candidates) undertaking study or research with JCU in respect of all actions and activities (including inaction or inactivity) relating to the conduct of academic work.

For JCU students studying in Australia, the administration of all academic misconduct matters will be facilitated by the Office of Student Matters. For JCU students studying in Singapore, the administration of all academic misconduct matters will be facilitated by the Examinations and Graduation Office. Each is referred to as the ‘Academic Misconduct administration team’.

Academic Misconduct may occur with:

• all assessments, both invigilated and non-invigilated;
• practicums or placements;
• applications or submissions intended to obtain academic advantage, including for special consideration, extensions, or credit and recognition of prior learning;
• research activities, including seeking ethical and other clearances required prior to commencing research, collecting, storing and disclosing data, using the intellectual property of others, data analysis and reporting;
• theses and other work presented as part of Higher Degrees by Research, honours and other postgraduate courses.

Definitions

Except as otherwise specified in this procedure, the meaning of terms used in this procedure are as per the Student Code of Conduct or the Policy Glossary.

Introduction

The Student Code of Conduct defines Academic Misconduct. Instances of Academic Misconduct include:

a. cheating, collusion and plagiarism (including self-plagiarism);

b. making a false representation to gain academic advantage;

c. tampering, or attempting to tamper, with examination papers, scripts, class work, grades or academic records;

d. breaching the examination requirements in an attempt to disrupt an examination or to gain an academic advantage;

e. failing to abide by reasonable directions of a member of academic staff in relation to academic matters, including directions regarding individual responsibility for the submission of assessable work;

f. the improper use of University facilities, information or the intellectual property of others without permission;

g. the improper use of a personal relationship with University staff to gain academic advantage;

h. acquiring, or attempting to acquire, possess, or distribute examination materials or information about assessment without approval;

i. impersonating another student, or arranging for anyone to impersonate a student, in an examination, assessment task, prerequisite or assessment hurdle;

j. submitting any document or file that the University requires of the student to meet academic requirements (e.g. medical certificate or other supporting documentation, placement evaluations) which has been altered, fabricated, or, which fraudulently attempts to certify, confirm or authorise the information it contains;

k. altering a group’s submission for assessment without the participating students’ consent;

l. participating in or initiating contract-cheating by completing, purchasing or otherwise procuring pre-written or specially prepared assessment items from a third party, or sharing JCU assessments, course and subject materials to a third party; or

m. use of artificial intelligence or paraphrasing software for purposes not sanctioned by the assessment specifications - unless AI use is expressly allowed in an assessment and cited appropriately, students must not use it to produce assessable content; or

n. failing to comply with a penalty imposed under this Procedure; or

o. any other acts or omissions not included in a) - n) above which in the opinion of the Chair of the Academic Board reasonably represents Academic Misconduct or a breach of the Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research.

Procedure

Any person, including staff, students, members of the University community or public may report an instance of suspected academic misconduct to the University.

1. Reports of suspected Academic Misconduct – coursework students

1.1 Staff must report suspected Academic Misconduct as soon as possible after the suspected misconduct is detected or observed using the Report Academic or Professional Misconduct online form, attaching evidence to support the allegation.

1.2 Students and members of the public can report suspected academic misconduct by emailing studentmatters@jcu.edu.au in Australia, or exams-singapore@jcu.edu.au in Singapore.

1.3 Subject to clause 1.4, if the student has received a finalised result for the subject that the allegation relates to, only serious misconduct will proceed through this process.

1.4 Where suspected Academic Misconduct is identified through centrally administered examinations (including Respondus or other online invigilation) and the report is received within one month of the release of final subject results, the matter may still be considered under this procedure. After that period, only allegations of Serious Misconduct will proceed.

1.5 Upon receipt of a report of academic misconduct the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will check for instances of previous proven misconduct within three University Working Days. The relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will refer the Report, including all attached evidence, and any other relevant information such as instances of previous proven misconduct, to the Authorised Delegate.

1.6 Allegations of academic misconduct related to invigilated examinations during a formal examination period will be referred to the Director, Student Services and Support (Australia) or Senior Director Academic Services and Progressions (Singapore).  Allegations of Academic Misconduct related to all other assessment will be referred to the relevant Academic Head, or the College/Campus Dean if the Academic Head is also the Subject Coordinator (Authorised Delegate).

1.7 The Authorised Delegate will conduct a preliminary evaluation based on the evidence provided within 10 University Working Days of receiving the report to determine the seriousness of the conduct, and if the matter should be dismissed if the evidence is insufficient or the allegations are deemed to be unfounded, vexatious or trivial, or if the matter should proceed to an Academic Misconduct Hearing.

1.7.1 If the allegation is dismissed the Authorised Delegate will inform the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team (Office of Student Matters in Australia or Examinations Team in Singapore) of their decision and reasons, and the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will notify the referring person outlining the reasons for dismissal and provide cautionary advice to the student where appropriate.

1.7.2 If the allegation meets the criteria of Serious Misconduct (refer to Appendix 1 of the Student Code of Conduct) the matter will be heard by the College/Campus Dean as Authorised Delegate.

1.8 The timelines specified in this procedure are indicative and are intended to support the timely handling of complaints and allegations. Where a timeline is not met, this will be noted in communication to students; however, the validity of decisions made under this procedure will not be affected.

2. Reports of suspected Academic Misconduct – postgraduate research students

2.1 Suspected Academic Misconduct in relation to any assessment including thesis presentation or other assessable work contributing toward a postgraduate award of the University administered by a College shall be referred to the relevant Academic Head (or College Dean if the Academic Head is on the Advisory Panel) as Authorised Delegate.

2.2 Suspected Academic Misconduct in relation to a research higher degree administered by the Graduate Research School shall be referred to the Dean, Graduate Research and Researcher Development (or the DVC Research if the Dean, Graduate Research and Researcher Development is the student’s Principal Supervisor) as Authorised Delegate (refer to clause 6 of Managing and Investigating Potential Breaches of the JCU Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research Procedure).

3. Support for students facing Academic Misconduct Allegations

3.1 Students facing academic misconduct allegations will be referred to the JCU Student Association Advocates for support navigating JCU complaint processes (Australia) or the Student Advisory team (Singapore), and are to be advised of the free and confidential Counselling and Wellbeing Services available.

3.2 Students will also be notified of the right to a Support Person whilst responding to misconduct processes. The Support Person must not be a lawyer unless by prior written approval of the Authorised Delegate.

4. Academic Misconduct Allegation

4.1 Within 15 University Working Days of the Report submission, the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will notify the student in writing that an allegation/s of academic misconduct has been made against them.  The student will be provided with sufficient detail, including any evidence presented, to enable them to understand the precise nature of the allegation/s, and to properly be able to respond to it.

4.2 A student who receives an allegation/s of Academic Misconduct is required to respond to the allegation/s in writing within 10 University Working Days. Where authorised in writing by the student, a Support Person or JCUSA Student Advocate may assist the student in the presentation of their case. For Singapore campus students, the student may seek advice from the Student Advisory team but this team cannot assist in the presentation of the case at hearing.

4.3 If a student does not respond within 10 University Working Days of the notification of allegation/s, or otherwise fails to engage in the process, this does not halt the process and a hearing of the matter will proceed.

5. Academic Misconduct Hearing

5.1 In consultation with the Authorised Delegate the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will set a date, time and location for the hearing of the allegation/s.  Where possible the hearing should be scheduled as soon as practicable, but no sooner than 10 University Working Days after the notice of allegation/s being sent to the student to allow sufficient time for the student to seek advice and/or support.

5.2 Upon scheduling the hearing, the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will notify the student in writing to their JCU email address the following:

5.2.1 The name of the Authorised Delegate hearing the allegation/s;

5.2.2 The date, time and location of the hearing;

5.2.3 Information regarding the student’s right to attend and be heard in relation to the allegation/s;

5.2.4 Information regarding the student’s right to have a support person or student advocate attend with them.

5.3 The student will be given the opportunity to be heard by the Authorised Delegate.  That opportunity may be provided in person, or by video conference, additional written submission or by other means of communication approved by the Authorised Delegate. If conducted by video conference, only the student and their Support Person or JCUSA Student Advocate may be in attendance. The Authorised Delegate may request an environmental scan to ensure this.

5.4 The Authorised Delegate will consider the allegations and the student's response to determine whether the allegation is proven or not proven on the balance of probability after considering:

5.4.1 The materials provided by the person alleging the Academic Misconduct weighing up the sufficiency and reliability of various evidence; and

5.4.2 Any oral and/or written testimony provided by the student or evidence relevant to the allegation.

6. Notice of hearing decision

6.1 The Authorised Delegate will communicate the outcome of the Academic Misconduct Hearing in writing to the relevant Academic Misconduct administration team within 10 University Working Days of the hearing.

6.2 The Authorised Delegate’s decision must record:

6.2.1 the evidence considered;

6.2.2 findings in relation to the allegations;

6.2.3 reasons for those findings; and

6.2.4 if the decision is that the academic misconduct is proven, the penalty applied (as per Appendix 1 of the Student Code of Conduct) and whether the instance of academic misconduct is to be recorded on the student’s internal and/or external academic transcript.

6.3 Where the academic misconduct has been proven the Authorised Delegate will:

6.3.1 offer counselling by the Academic Head or Dean on the importance of maintaining high levels of academic integrity at Australian universities, and advise on the possible consequences of any further instances of academic misconduct;

6.3.2 where instances of second or repeat offences of academic misconduct are proven, consider the application of more serious penalties as specified in Appendix 1 of the Student Code of Conduct.

6.4 The relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will send to the student at their JCU email the Hearing Determination within one University Working Day of receipt and include information on the student’s right to appeal if they remain dissatisfied with the Authorised Delegate’s decision.

6.5 The relevant Academic Misconduct administration team will note the instance of proven academic misconduct on the student’s record in the Student Management System, and this may be made visible on the internal and/or external academic transcript as advised by the Authorised Delegate.

7. Academic Misconduct post-conferral

7.1 The University may revoke awards or credit obtained through fraud or academic or research misconduct if discovered post-conferral as per the Award Finalisation and Graduation Policy.

8. Internal Appeal

8.1 A Student may appeal any determination made by an Authorised Delegate in accordance with the University's Student Review and Appeals Policy and Complaint and Conduct Decisions Appeal Procedure.

9. External Appeal

9.1 A student studying at the Australian campuses may appeal a decision of the University to:

9.1.1 the Queensland Ombudsman. The Ombudsman focuses on issues relating to procedural fairness rather than issues relating to academic or professional judgement and will usually only review a matter once all internal rights of review have been exhausted.

9.1.2 the National Student Ombudsman (NSO). The NSO can resolve complaints by referring the student back to the University, use an alternative dispute resolution process or a restorative justice engagement process, or investigate a complaint.

9.2 Students studying at the Singapore campus may appeal a decision of the University via the Singapore Government’s SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) dispute resolution service. The student may approach SkillsFuture Singapore for help. Note: after reviewing a complaint, SkillsFuture Singapore may refer students to the SSG Mediation – Arbitration Scheme and there may be additional costs to use this scheme.

10. Record keeping

10.1 Notes and documentation must be kept at all stages of the Academic Misconduct process, including records of meetings, discussions, and hearings. These documents may be used in Appeal processes.

10.2 All records and notes produced, and documents considered, must be stored in an appropriate, confidential University file. The file must be created and stored in line with University policy.

Related policy instruments

Student Code of Conduct

Higher Degree by Research Policy

Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research

Managing and Investigating Potential Breaches of the JCU Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research Procedure

Review of a Student’s Suitability to Continue a Course Involving Placement

Intellectual Property Policy and Procedure

Copyright Policy and Procedure

Social Media Policy

Digital Technologies Acceptable Use Procedure

Library Use Policy

Student Review and Appeals Policy

Complaint and Conduct  Decisions Appeal Procedure

Report Academic or Professional Misconduct online form

Schedules/Appendices

Nil

Administration

NOTE:  Printed copies of this procedure are uncontrolled, and currency can only be assured at the time of printing.

Approval Details

Revision History