Malpractice Policy
Aim
The aim of this policy is to ensure that there are no actions taken to undermine integrity of the assessment process and certification of the qualifications.
Malpractice is defined as any deliberate activity, neglect, default or other practice that compromises the integrity of the assessment process, and/or the validity of certificates. Malpractice may include a range of issues from the failure to maintain appropriate records or systems to the deliberate falsification of records in order to claim certificates. Failure by a centre to deal with identified issues may in itself constitute malpractice.
Maladministration is any activity, neglect, default or other practice that results in the centre or candidate not complying with the specified requirements for delivery of the qualifications and as set out in the relevant codes of practice where applicable.
Procedure
Malpractice may be identified in a number of ways, by training providers, training provider staff, apprentices, students, external awarding/end point assessment organisations and members of the public. Kaplan does not tolerate actions or attempted actions of malpractice.
Staff
The following are examples of training providers and staff malpractice. Failing to meet Awarding Organisation centre approval requirements by:
- not advising an Awarding/End Point Assessment Organisation of changes which affect the delivery of a qualification
- not complying with an action plan within the agreed timescale
- not meeting assessment and internal quality assurance requirements
- not keeping apprentice of student assessments secure
Influencing the assessment process by:
- giving improper assistance to candidates
- attributing marks for internally assessed work where there is no evidence to support the marks given
- making inappropriate claims for certificates
Failing to conduct assessments in accordance with the criteria laid out in the rules of assessment by:
- failing to ensure the security of assessment papers in advance of the exam
- improper assessment invigilation
- improper use and sharing of Awarding/End Point Assessment Organisation assessment materials
The above is not an exhaustive list and other forms of malpractice; misconduct or maladministration may arise.
Learners
Learner malpractice is defined as the act of attempting to gain an unfair advantage in an assessment and calling into question the integrity of an award by:
- possessing unauthorised materials in a controlled assessment (including notes written on any aspect of the person’s body, mobile telephones, smart watches, PDAs, notebooks)
- asking another candidate to sit the assessment in their place
- collusion with other candidates and/or centre staff such as copying
- falsely declaring authenticity of an assessment submission knowing this not to be true including plagiarism
- possessing a mobile phone within an assessment venue, unless this is specifically permitted. For example, a remote assessment where it is a condition of the exam
- behaving in a disruptive manner
- communicating with other apprentices or students during exam conditions
- failing to adhere to the invigilator’s instructions
All of these examples include exams and other assessments (paper-based, online, remote or other approved methods) whether facilitated within the training provider’s premises, workplace or other approved exam and assessment locations.
This list should not be considered exhaustive.
Rules and regulations for conduct are set out in the appropriate Awarding/End Point Assessment Organisations’ instructions; all appropriate staff should be aware of the relevant requirements and comply with them fully.
Kaplan and the Awarding/End Point Assessment Organisation may enforce penalties and/or sanctions on Learners where incidents or (attempted incidents) of malpractice have been identified and proven.
Kaplan’s rigorous exam and assessment process will be open and fair when handling incidents or (attempted incidents) of malpractice.
Reporting
When instances or suspected instances of malpractice/maladministration are discovered a report will be issued to the Awarding/End Point Assessment Organisation by either the Quality Development and Improvement Manager, Service Operations Manager, Student Experience Manager or AAT Curriculum Manager, dependant on the type of assessment and the Awarding Organisation. Reports will be submitted within the organisation’s stipulated timeframes and as soon as reasonably possible once all information has been collated.
The following may be involved in malpractice Investigations:
- Course Assessor/Tutor/Talent Coach
- Quality Manager or Quality Lead
- Managers from Faculty or Apprenticeships Team
- Service Operations Manager
- Student Experience staff
- Awarding Bodies and Institutes
Apprentice and students may be contacted by:
- Quality Manager or Quality Lead
- Service Operations Manager
- Managers from Student Experience, Faculty or Apprenticeships Team
- AAT Curriculum Manager
- Awarding Bodies and Institutes
Appealing the outcome of the Malpractice Investigation
Appeals against the outcome of any Malpractice Investigation can be made in writing to the identified person listed above. This must be done within 5 working days of the decision being released to the parties involved.
In some cases of Computer Based Assessments, the Awarding Body or Institute will determine the outcome once they have all the required evidence. In these instances they would make the learner aware of the outcome. Any subsequent appeal would need to be made directly to the Body or Institute.
arrow_back Back to policies