Procedure Number: 005	Malpractice & Maladministration Policy
	Date of Last Revision:	17/2/2020
	Date of Last Review:	17/2/2020
	Date of Next Review:	17/2/2021

 

1.0 Policy Statement

 

We are firmly committed to upholding the quality of the qualifications we deliver.  Our candidates will be assessed and examined under specified controlled conditions that are consistent and provide all of our candidates with an equal opportunity to demonstrate their capability and be successful.

 

Consequently, cheating or any type of dishonest behaviour that breaches our rules may result in the candidate being disqualified and in the case of staff malpractice the person(s) concerned may become the subject of a disciplinary hearing.

 

The purpose of this document is to:

 

• Define malpractice and maladministration.
• Describe the procedure to be followed where there is reason to believe that malpractice and/or maladministration has occurred.

 

2.0 Definitions

 

• Malpractice is any occasion where the event, either deliberate or unintentional gives a candidate an unfair advantage during an examination or assessment.

 

• Maladministration is where a mistake made by our centre staff compromises the integrity of the examination or assessment environment under controlled conditions.

 

Irrespective of the type of event and the people involved we will investigate thoroughly.  Our underlying commitment is to protect the validity and quality of our qualifications and the integrity of the Training Academy, its staff and reputation.

 

3.0 Candidate Malpractice

 

This statement refers to the behaviour of a candidate during controlled examination and/or assessment conditions.  Examples of candidate malpractice are set out below:

 

• Behaving in such a way that enables the candidate to gain an unfair advantage.
• Altering official documents such as exam report forms, marking sheets and certificates.
• Impersonating a candidate.
• Providing false ID.
• Copying somebody else’s work.
• Colluding or attempting to collude with others.
• Distracting others under controlled conditions.
• Being in possession of electronic devices not permitted in an examination.
• Obtaining or attempting to obtain examination/assessment materials prior to the planned event.
• Disseminating confidential materials to others.
• Attempting to bribe staff.

 

These are some examples.  This list is not comprehensive and we reserve the right to define other instances of malpractice at our discretion.

 

4.0 Centre Malpractice

 

This statement refers to the behaviour of staff employed by the Training Academy.  Examples of centre malpractice are set out below:

 

• Altering official documents such as answer sheets, reports and certificates.
• Attempting to bribe an examiner, assessor or verifier.
• Attempting to influence other staff involved in the examination/assessment process.
• Removing examination papers and keeping them.
• Disseminating examination/assessment material.
• Failing to keep examination/assessment materials secure before the event.
• Providing unauthorised assistance to a candidate during an examination or assessment.

 

These are some examples.  This list is not comprehensive and we reserve the right to define other instances of centre malpractice at our discretion.

 

5.0 Centre Maladministration

 

These are instances where centre staff have done or not done something that can adversely affect the integrity of the examination/assessment process and environment.  Some examples are set out below:

 

• Failing to provide the candidates with sufficient information to complete details on the assessment materials eg candidate registration number.
• Failing to notify candidates of the time and location.
• Not carrying out ID checks when required.
• Leaving candidates under assessment unsupervised.
• Not completing documentation/returns correctly.

 

These are some examples.  This list is not comprehensive and we reserve the right to define other instances of centre maladministration at our discretion.

 

6.0 Reporting a Suspected Incident

 

Any incident may be reported in a number of different ways:

 

• By the Academy e.g. in a report from a member of staff concerned.
• By a candidate e.g. in a letter to the Training Academy Manager.
• By an examiner, assessor, verifier e.g. in their official report.

 

7.0 Investigation

 

If an incident is reported we have a duty to investigate.  This investigation will be completed by the IQA.  We have many ways of collecting information regarding conduct during an examination and/or assessment.  Any relevant information will be passed to the investigating person.  Examples of the types of evidence we can collect are:

 

• Examiner, assessor, verifier report forms.
• Any recordings, audio or visual, relating to the event.
• Supervisor’s or invigilator’s reports.
• Inspection visit reports.
• Candidate statements collected at the time of the incident.
• Appeal documents.

 

If an incident of candidate malpractice is investigated any supporting evidence will be looked at first and a decision made whether there is a case to answer.  If there is a case any results will be withheld and the candidate notified in writing.  The candidate has 10 working days to respond and appeal (appeal procedure applies).  Any outcomes are subject to the processes involved in the appeal.

 

If an incident of centre malpractice or maladministration is reported then all results for the group will be withheld and the candidates notified in writing.  The member of staff concerned will be notified in writing and will have 10 working days to respond.  If there is a case to answer then the staff member may be disciplined accordingly but has the right to lodge a grievance.  No results will be released until the matter has concluded.  If there is no case to answer then all results will be released.

 

8.0 Review

 

This policy forms part of the quarterly standardisation meeting and its action plans.  The document is reviewed annually.

 

9.0 Revisions

 

Date	Pages / Sections	Issue Status	Amendment Details
17/2/2020	All	Issue 1	First issue of policy