Introduction and Purpose
This policy sets out how Primary Goal will deal with allegations of malpractice and maladministration
in relation to qualifications delivered. This policy applies to all staff or other individuals who may
interact with Primary Goal’s qualifications.
It is important that anyone involved in the management, assessment and quality assurance of all
qualifications, including learners, are fully aware of the contents of the policy and that arrangements
are in place to prevent and investigate instances of malpractice and maladministration.
For the purpose of this document, malpractice is defined as ‘any act, or failure to act, that threatens
or compromises the integrity of the assessment process or the validity of qualifications and their
certification.’
This includes maladministration and the failure to maintain appropriate records or systems, the
deliberate falsification of records or documents for any reason connected to the award of
qualifications, acts of plagiarism or other academic misconduct, the failure to obtain or carry out
appropriate checks on learner identification, and/or actions that compromise the reputation or
authority of Primary Goal or of the awarding bodies.
Reporting Events of Malpractice or Maladministration
Upon notification of a suspected malpractice, Primary Goal will appoint a lead investigator, usually a
senior member of the Quality Team, to assess the risk of the case and determine if the awarding body
need to be informed immediately. The lead investigator will independently review all evidence
provided and decide as to whether the allegation is a case of malpractice. If it is found to be
malpractice, action will be taken accordingly which may result in a sanction being imposed.
Primary Goal will report all relevant cases of suspected malpractice to the appropriate Awarding
Organisation, in line with their individual policies and procedures, accepting that in certain
circumstances the Awarding Organisation may act of its own accord, including imposing sanctions.
Where the malpractice is deemed as low risk, a record of all cases of malpractice will be recorded on
file and made available to the awarding body at each external verification visit.
Learner Malpractice
Some examples of learner malpractice are described below. These examples are not exhaustive and
all incidents of suspected malpractice, whether described below, will be fully investigated, where
there are sufficient grounds to do so:
• Obtaining examination or assessment material without authorisation.
• Arranging for an individual other than the learner to sit an assessment or exam; or to submit an
assignment not undertaken by the learner.
• Impersonating another learner to sit an assessment or exam; or to submit an assignment on their
behalf.
• Collaborating with another learner or individual, by any means, to complete a coursework
assignment or assessment, unless it has been clearly stated that such collaboration is
permitted.
• Misrepresentation or plagiarism.
• Copying the work of another learner or knowingly allowing another student to copy from their
own work.
• Damaging another learner’s work.
• Inclusion of inappropriate or offensive material in assessment answers.
• Failure to comply with published awarding bodies’ examination regulations.
• Disruptive behaviour or unacceptable conduct, including the use of offensive language, at a
centre or assessment venue, including via telephone or email to staff (including aggressive or
offensive language or behaviour).
• Producing, using, or allowing the use of forged or falsified documentation, including but not
limited to personal identification, supporting evidence provided for reasonable adjustment or
special consideration applications, or awarding body results documentation (including
certificates).
• Falsely obtaining, by any means, a certificate.
• Fraudulent claims for special consideration while studying.
Examinations held on site or remotely:
• Possession of any materials not permitted in the assessment room, regardless of whether they
are relevant to the assessment, or whether the learner refers to them during the assessment
process. Examples could include notes, blank paper, electronic devices, personal organisers,
books, dictionaries/calculators (when prohibited).
• Communicating in any form with other learners in the assessment room when it is prohibited, or
other individuals in the learner’s environment within a remote exam setting.
• Copying the work of another learner or knowingly allowing another student to copy from their
own work.
• Failure to comply with instructions given by the assessment invigilator, i.e., working beyond the
allocated time, refusing to hand in assessment script/paper when requested, or not adhering to
warnings relating to conduct during the assessment.
Centre Employee Malpractice
Examples of malpractice and maladministration by centre staff and individuals involved with
assessment and delivery (including, where the centre is also an examination centre, invigilators and
examination administrators) are listed below. These examples are not exhaustive and all incidents of
suspected malpractice, whether described below, will be fully investigated, where there are sufficient
grounds to do so.
Please note – centre staff relates to all individuals working for Primary Goal in an employed, temporary
or freelance capacity, regardless of role.
• Failure to adhere to the relevant regulations and procedures, including those relating to centre
approval, security undertaking and monitoring requirements as set out by the awarding bodies.
• Failure to follow agreed internal processes resulting in mis-claims for certificates.
• Failure to report suspected plagiarism or learner malpractice to the Quality Team.
• Failure to adhere to Awarding Organisation requirements in relation to the assessment of learner
work.
• Knowingly allowing an individual to impersonate a learner.
• Allowing a student to copy another student’s assignment work or allowing a student to let their
own work be copied.
• Allowing students to work collaboratively during an assessment, unless specified in the
assignment brief.
• Completing an assessed assignment for a student or providing them with assistance beyond
that ‘normally’ expected.
• Damaging or losing a student’s work.
• Disruptive behaviour or unacceptable conduct, including the use of offensive language
(including aggressive or offensive language or behaviour).
• Allowing disruptive behaviour or unacceptable conduct at the centre to go unchallenged, for
example, aggressive or offensive language or behaviour.
• Producing, using, or allowing the use of forged or falsified documentation, including but not
limited to personal identification, supporting evidence provided for reasonable adjustment or
special consideration applications, or awarding body results documentation (including
certificates).
• Falsely obtaining, by any means, a certificate including but not limited to:
• Not following internal processes leading to incorrect certificate claims and awards.
• Mis-claims and mis-awards.
• Not appropriately checking or obtaining identification for learners.
• Failing to report a suspected case of learner malpractice to awarding bodies.
Examinations held on site or remotely:
• Moving the time or date of a fixed examination.
• Failure to keep examination question papers, examination scripts or other assessment materials
secure, before, during or after an examination.
• Failure to keep accurate records before, during, or after an examination.
• Allowing a learner to possess and/or use material or electronic devices that are not permitted in
the examination room.
• Allowing learners to communicate by any means during an examination in breach of regulations.
• Allowing a learner to work beyond the allotted examination time.
• Leaving learners unsupervised during an examination.
• Assisting or prompting candidates with the production of answers.
Sanctions
Following an investigation, if a case of malpractice is upheld, Primary Goal may impose sanctions or
other penalties on the individual(s) concerned. Where relevant, we will report the matter to the
awarding bodies who may impose one or more sanctions upon the individual(s) concerned. Any
sanctions imposed will reflect the seriousness of the malpractice that has occurred. Listed below are
examples of sanctions that may be applied to a learner, or to a member of centre staff who has had a
case of malpractice upheld against them.
The following should also be noted:
• This list is not exhaustive, and other sanctions may be applied on a case-by-case basis.
• Where the malpractice affects examination performance, awarding bodies may impose sanctions
of their own.
• Centre staff relates to all individuals working for Primary Goal in an employed, temporary or
freelance capacity, regardless of role.
Possible centre sanctions that may be applied to learners:
a) Work submitted may be rejected and must be recompleted.
b) A written warning about future conduct.
c) Notification to an employer, regulator or the police.
d) Removal from the course.
e) Certificate may be invalidated.
Possible sanctions that may be applied to centre staff:
a) Additional training and development given.
b) Performance management and capability/disciplinary procedures, potentially leading to
dismissal.
c) Restriction of duties.
d) Unannounced monitoring of working practices.
e) Informing any other organisation known to employ or be associated with the individual in
relation to our courses or examinations of the outcome of the case.
The above policy is to be used in conjunction with other policies of Primary Goal and relevant Awarding
Organisations.
Review
Primary Goal will continue to review the contents of this policy and review annually.
