Monash University > Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences > Current >

Plagiarism Policy

Collusion, collaboration, plagiarism and cheating

Policy approved by Faculty Executive Committee on 30/01/2007

Definition
Advice to students
Appropriate action
Discipline committee
Related Documentation and procedures

Definition

‘Cheating’ means seeking to obtain an unfair advantage in an examination or in other written or practical work required to be submitted or completed by a student for assessment.

‘Assisting to cheat’ means assisting a student with an examination or other written or practical work with the intention that the student will thereby obtain an unfair advantage.

‘Plagiarism’ – means to take and use another person’s ideas and or manner of expressing them and to pass them off as one’s own by failing to give appropriate acknowledgement.

‘Collusion’ – Plagiarism may take the form of similar work submitted by students who may have worked together under circumstances where this is not allowed. This is quite distinct from collaboration where students work together on a joint project.

If students present as their own work that which is nearly identical to that of another student, that is copied from another person, has been presented by a previous student, or has been presented by a student at another institution, this will be interpreted as cheating.

Where work submitted for assessment by two or more persons is the same or substantially the same, the work so submitted is prima facie evidence of cheating by those persons.

Plagiarism is regarded as a form of theft and the Pocket Oxford Dictionary defines "plagiarise" as "publish borrowed thoughts as original; steal (thoughts), steal from (work, author)". Plagiarism is therefore "theft" and is a serious offence.

When quoting or paraphrasing material from other sources, those sources must be acknowledged in full. It may be useful to seek the help of a tutor in preparing the piece of work and discuss concepts with fellow students in sorting out ideas, but the final product must be written by the student in his or her own words.

Plagiarism occurs when students fail to acknowledge that ideas have been borrowed. Specifically it occurs when:

phrases and passages are used verbatim without quotation marks and without a reference to the author;
an author's work is paraphrased and presented without a reference;
other students' work is copied;
items of assessment are written in conjunction with other students (without prior permission of the relevant staff member);
a piece of work has already been submitted or assessed in this or another unit.

Advice to students

Student Rights Officers are available to provide independent advocacy, assistance and advice in relation to a disciplinary matter.

In accordance with the University Plagiarism policy students are required to submit an Assignment Cover Sheet for non-examination assessment, which defines plagiarism and requires students to certify that plagiarism or unauthorized collusion has not occurred.

Coversheets should include the following:

a confidentiality statement
the approved definition of plagiarism
a statement on collusion
the approved privacy statement
boxes to indicate whether the assessment was done on a group basis
a statement that the faculty uses plagiarism detection software to be signed as acknowledgement by the student
a certification by the student that:

(a) plagiarism or unauthorized collusion has not occurred;

(b) the assignment is original and has not previously submitted as part of another unit/course

(d) that they have understood and adhered to confidentiality statement

(e) the assessor of the assignment may for the purposes of assessment, reproduce the assignment and:

I. Provide to another member of faculty; and/or

II. Communicate it to a plagiarism checking service (which may then retain a copy of the assignment on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking);

III. The student understands the consequences for engaging in plagiarism as described in University Statute 4.1 Part III – Academic Misconduct

The following information should be given to students:

When you paraphrase another person's argument, exposition, or interpretation, or borrow another person's distinctive phrase, concept, suggestion, or factual finding, you must indicate this by immediately acknowledging the source.

When you quote directly from another source of any kind, you must indicate this both by

immediately giving the source, and by
either using quotation marks or (for a quotation longer than three lines) identifying the quote without quotation marks. (N.B. Simply giving the source without using quote marks (or indenting as well) is not enough and will be considered plagiarism.) You must use three dots (...) to indicate a deletion in the middle of a quoted sentence; 4 dots (....) a deletion at the end of a sentence and square brackets [ ] to indicate an insertion.

Work submitted for assessment in a course or unit may not be submitted at another time in that course or at any time in another course.

It is accepted that students will assist each other with problems associated with their studies and discuss issues with each other. Sometimes advice may be sought by one student from others relating to minor issues of comprehension, interpretation or further explanation of a point made by the lecturer during a class. However, all assigned work, must be undertaken by students independently and students must not work in groups (two or more) unless specifically requested to do so by the lecturer. In such situations, the lecturer is to be notified of the names of the group members and normally they will each be awarded the same mark.

Unit Guide information provided to students at the start of semester should include references to:

University materials on plagiarism
Statute 4.1 on Discipline
Student Resource Guide – section on plagiarism
Student Resource Guide – section on Student Rights and Reasonable Expectations
Faculty Plagiarism policy (this document)
any school/department materials on plagiarism and non examinable cheating, and the distinction between plagiarism and cheating (see above).
The Faculty’s use of plagiarism detection software and need for students to view and acknowledge the Faculty policy on the use of plagiarism software to detect where students have plagiarised or sought advantage by using the work of others without due recognition. Students will be required to sign a statement that it is the student's responsibility to make themselves familiar with the contents of these documents.

Appropriate action in the case of unintentional plagiarism

In the process of dealing with cases of suspected cheating, it is important to distinguish between intentional plagiarism (non examinable cheating), copying of work with intent to gain an unfair advantage and unintentional plagiarism copying of work without due acknowledgement. Plagiarism may be considered unintentional, and therefore a misdemeanour, where the student has simply quoted other sources without due acknowledgement. Where the staff member determines that the plagiarism was unintentional they are required to counsel and warn the student of further transgressions.

Appropriate action in the case of collusion, cheating or plagiarism

Unless there are substantial factors to indicate that plagiarism was accidental or unintentional, plagiarism will be treated as non examination cheating.

A member of the teaching staff who has reasonable grounds to believe that non-examination cheating has occurred, must report the matter to the chief examiner.

Where the chief examiner has reasonable grounds to believe that non-examination cheating has occurred, the chief examiner must:

disallow the work concerned by prohibiting assessment; or
report the matter to the Deputy Dean (Teaching and Quality).

Where a student's work has been disallowed the chief examiner must give written notice of the disallowance to: –

the student
the Deputy Dean (Teaching and Quality) and
the Director Academic Programs (for recording on the Plagiarism Register),

including advice that the student may appeal within 28 days of the date of the written notice; and the student may appeal to the faculty discipline committee.

Work which has been disallowed must be retained by the faculty until the 28 day appeal period has expired.

Collaboration/Collusion

Plagiarism may take the form of similar work submitted by students who may have worked together. It is essential that teaching staff provide students with clear instructions as to whether they have been permitted to work on the assignment jointly, or individually. The incidence of collaborative work should be made absolutely clear.

The procedures for dealing with collusion, collaboration, plagiarism and cheating are set out by the University and can be found at: http://www.policy.monash.edu/policy-bank/academic/education/conduct/plagiarism-procedures.html

Faculty discipline committee

An appeal to a faculty discipline committee under paragraph 5.1.1 or 8.3.2 of the University Statute must:

be in writing,
be addressed to the faculty manager,
set out the grounds of the appeal
be lodged with the faculty manager within 28 days after imposition of the penalty or notice of disallowance concerned.

If the work is substantially similar, or there is evidence that a student has assisted another student to cheat, the chief examiner must report the matter to the faculty manager’s nominee the Deputy Dean (Teaching and Quality).

Where a matter is reported to a faculty manager’s nominee under paragraph 4.1.3, section 7 or paragraph 8.2.2 of the University Statute, or an appeal to a faculty discipline committee is lodged with a faculty manager ‘nominee under subsection 9.1 of the University Statute, subject to subsection 9.3, the faculty manager’s nominee must:

within 28 days or any longer period necessary in any particular case, constitute a faculty discipline committee to hear and determine the matter; and
notify the student in writing of the time and place of the hearing.

In a case of alleged academic misconduct, subsection 9.2 of the University Statute applies only where the faculty manager’s nominee is satisfied that there is a prima facie case against the student concerned.