- Short courses & Certificates
Postgraduate study with Governance Institute of Australia
- Graduate Certificate of Applied Risk Management
- Graduate Diploma of Applied Risk Management and Corporate Governance
- Graduate Diploma of Applied Corporate Governance
- Key dates & fees
Calendar of postgraduate classes
Request more information about our postgraduate courses
- Enrolment information
- Learning with the experts
- Academic misconduct guidelines
- Postgraduate English Language Requirements Policy
- Postgraduate courses admissions policy
- Postgraduate Exemption Policy
- Postgraduate Pattern of Exemptions Guidelines
- Postgraduate courses five-year completion policy
- Refund policy
- Subject completion policy
- Student at Risk Policy
- Assessment appeals guidelines
- Assignment rules & procedures
- Examination rules & procedures
- Postgraduate academic record
- Chant Legacy Scholarship for postgraduate study in governance
- Online Learning Centre demonstration
- Calendar of events & short courses
- Tailored governance solutions
- In-house training
Academic misconduct guidelines
1.1 These guidelines have been prepared to outline the procedures established by Governance Institute of Australia to deal with allegations of academic misconduct committed by a student.
2.0 General principles applicable to academic misconduct
2.1 Governance Institute’s guiding philosophy is that all students are entitled to be treated fairly and without bias, with dignity and paying due regard to their privacy.
2.2 In view of their serious nature, all academic misconduct matters will be dealt with by the Governance Institute without undue delay.
2.3 Students are entitled to be regarded as not having behaved in the alleged manner until and unless they admit to that behaviour or a fair and proper inquiry leads to a reasonable conclusion that they have so behaved.
2.4 Each case will be dealt with on its own merits and in accordance with its own circumstances.
3.0 Academic misconduct
3.1 Because of the importance of maintaining the integrity of the assessment process, the Governance Institute expects all students to exhibit honest efforts and high ethical standards.
3.2 Academic misconduct is defined as any form of dishonesty displayed by a student with respect to an assessment element for a subject whereby the student seeks to gain an unfair advantage. Academic misconduct includes dishonest behaviour which conflicts with the study and assessment instructions given by the Governance Institute and any attempt by a student to submit assessment work that is not the student’s own work.
3.3 Accordingly, copying or using another’s work in assessment tasks by means of collaboration, plagiarism or cheating will not be tolerated by the Governance Institute. These are regarded by the Governance Institute as serious offences.
4.1 Any work submitted by a student should not be the product of collaboration with others, unless the Governance Institute clearly instructs students that collaborative work is permitted for that particular assessment item.
4.2 In order to facilitate their learning, the Governance Institute encourages students to study together and discuss the reading and research they have done in preparation for the assessment task. However, students must ensure that the material they submit for assessment is their own work and that it has been written independently from the work of others.
5.1 Plagiarism in an assessment item refers to a student’s use of or attempt to pass off, whether intentionally or carelessly, all or part of the wording, analysis or content as their own when it has been derived from other sources. It includes the failure by the student to acknowledge by way of proper attribution that certain material submitted for assessment is in fact the intellectual property of another person, having been derived from that person’s work. It also includes the deliberate adoption or misuse of another’s work with the intention of deceiving the marker into accepting that it represents the student’s own independent thought and effort.
5.2 Course directors and markers are instructed to draw to the attention of the National Director, Education and Training for investigation any evidence supporting a case of plagiarism which they encounter when marking assignments and examination scripts.
6.0 Misconduct during examinations
6.1 During the Governance Institute examinations, any student who speaks to another examination candidate either in the examination room or outside during a convenience break will be guilty of academic misconduct.
6.2 It will be the responsibility of the National Director, Education and Training to provide a student against whom an allegation of academic misconduct is made with a precise statement of the nature of the allegation, together with the supporting evidence, in order to ensure that the student has a clear understanding of what is being alleged against them and the case they have to answer.
6.3 The National Director, Education and Training will then refer the allegation of academic misconduct to the Governance Institute’s Academic Misconduct and Appeals Committee for hearing.
7.0 Academic Misconduct and Assessment Appeals Committee
7.1 The Academic Misconduct and Assessment Appeals Committee shall be comprised of a member of the Education Committee, a member of the Assessment Review Panel and an appropriately qualified senior academic who is not a member of either the Education Committee or the Assessment Review Panel.
7.2 Where an allegation of academic misconduct has been made against a student or a student appeals against the mark or grade awarded on an assessment, the National Director, Education and Training will be responsible for convening a meeting of the committee to conduct an inquiry which shall be held without undue delay.
7.3 The committee may meet either in person or by teleconference.
7.4 In its conduct of the inquiry, the committee shall observe the accepted principles of procedural fairness.
7.5 The student will be given adequate time to prepare for the inquiry and to deal with the information provided by the Governance Institute.
7.6 The student will have the opportunity to address the committee in person and present either written or oral argument or both in support of their case.
7.7 The student will have the right to call other persons to provide information in support of the student’s case and to question any person who has supplied information to the Governance Institute or to the committee.
7.8 In the case of an allegation of academic misconduct against a student, at the conclusion of the hearing the committee may make one of the following decisions:
- to dismiss the allegation
- to find the allegation proven without penalty
- to find the allegation proven and to impose one of the following penalties:
- a deduction of marks;
- a zero mark or fail grade;
- a reprimand or formal caution;
- a requirement to undertake further assessment;
- suspension or expulsion from the subject(s) or the course.
7.9 The Governance Institute will advise the student in writing of the decision of the committee and the reasons for that decision. This notice will be sent to the student no later than seven (7) business days after the date of the hearing.
7.10 In the event that either party is dissatisfied with the outcome of the hearing, then that party can request that the matter be referred to external arbitration. The external arbitrator shall be appointed by the Chair of the Education Committee.
|2.1||National Director, Education & Training||1 March 2016|
Do you want more information?
Acquire a postgraduate qualification in governance
Interested in expanding your skill set?
Maximise your career opportunities and work effectiveness
Ready to further your career?
The role of well trained and experienced governance advisers is a crucial part of any effective governance framework. John Hatton FGIA, former Company Secretary, Commonwealth Bank