Purpose of this Malpractice and Maladministration policy

​

The purpose of this policy is to prevent:-

 

1. learners being disadvantaged

2. costly and time-consuming investigations

3. reputational damage to the Centre, to awarding bodies and the wider qualifications sector

 

Responsibility for Malpractice and Maladministration Policy

 

 

The head of Centre understands what constitutes malpractice / maladministration activities (see definitions document) and communicate this and awarding bodies policies and procedures to its staff. Furthermore communicate to its staff the centre procedures for preventing and investigating allegations of suspected malpractice/maladministration

 

Identify types of Malpractice and Maladministration

 

1. Centre Malpractice and Maladministration

Insecurity of materials (Exam storage, marking guidance, learner evidence, assessment & internal quality assurance records)

Misuse of assessments, inappropriate adjustments of assessment materials, improper assistance, manufacturing evidence of competence, fabricating assessment or internal quality assurance records

Deliberate falsification of centre records in order to claim certificates and the transfer of in-accurate learner data to awarding bodies.

 

1. Learner Malpractice and Maladministration

The authentication of practical work

The preparation, content and authentication of evidence

Collusion with others

Copying from another learner Impersonation of another learner

Inclusion of inappropriate, offensive, discriminatory, or obscene material in evidence portfolios

Inappropriate conduct/behaviour during an internal or external assessment, that causes disruption to others

Frivolous content in exams or coursework

Use of unauthorised aids during assessments

 

 

Preventing Malpractice and Maladministration

 

Ensure that internal quality assurance is undertaken across all of the centres activities, regularly and rigorously, by appropriately trained and qualified staff

Develop a culture of transparency and honesty amongst its staff and learners

At centre level through on-going internal quality assurance activity and monitoring

At centre level through intelligence, complaints or feedback received from centre staff, learners etc.

Through scheduled external quality assurance activity and monitoring

Through monitoring of examinations by awarding bodies

Through external intelligence, complaints or feedback received from learners, centre staff, whistle blowers or other stakeholders

Through information from other organisations, awarding bodies, sector skills councils and funding agencies, etc.

At regulator level through intelligence, complaints or feedback received

 

 

 

Dealing with Malpractice and Maladministration

 

General

If discovered Malpractice and Maladministration should ensure as far as reasonably possible that all allegations are recorded in writing or electronically.

Note: this policy should be viewed alongside the malpractice and maladministration policies of awarding bodies as they may require an external examination of allegations. Copies of awarding body malpractice and maladministration policies can be found.

G:>HIT/Quality Assurance/Malpractice & Maladministration

Check online for latest copies.

Ensure that staff leading the investigation are independent of the staff/learners/function being investigated.

Inform those who are suspected of malpractice that they are entitled to know the necessary details of the case and the possible outcomes.

Submit the report and findings of their investigation to the awarding body if required.

Principles

There are certain Principles that need to be observed for conducting investigations into Malpractice and Maladministration:-

• Confidentiality

• Rights of individuals

• Retention and storage of evidence and records

• Decisions and action plans

• Sanctions

 

 

 

Stages of investigation

Stage 1: Briefing and record-keeping:-

Anyone involved in the conduct of an investigation should have a clear brief and understanding of their role.

All investigators must maintain an auditable record of their actions during an investigation to demonstrate that they have acted appropriately.

 

Stage 2: Establishing the facts:-

Investigators should review the evidence and associated documentation, including awarding bodies guidance on the delivery of the qualifications and internal quality assurance arrangements

 

Issues to be determined:-

• what occurred (nature of malpractice/substance of the allegations)

• why the incident occurred

• who was involved in the incident

• when it occurred

• where it occurred – there may be more than one location

• what action, if any, the centre has taken.

 

Stage 3: Interviews:-

Thorough preparation is needed prior to any interviews

Interviews should include prepared questions and responses should be recorded

Interviewers may find it helpful to use the ‘PEACE’ technique:-

• plan and prepare

• engage and explain

• account

• closure

• evaluation

Two people present during interviews (1 to interview, the other to take notes)

Interviewees may be accompanied by another individual of their choice and may choose not to answer questions.

 

 

Stage 4: Other contacts:-

In some cases, Learners or employers may need to be contacted for facts and information:-

• can be face-to-face interviews

• telephone interviews

• by post or by email

 

Whichever method - use a set of prepared questions and record the responses in writing as confirmation of their evidence. Investigators should log the number of attempts made to contact an individual.

 

Stage 5: Documentary evidence:-

Wherever possible, documentary evidence should be authenticated by reference to the author. This may include asking learners and others to confirm handwriting, dates and signatures.

 

Stage 6: Reporting:-

A draft report is prepared including all the relevant facts

 

Stage 7: Conclusions:-

The report may have to be reviewed by the awarding body, then decision will be made on the outcome in order to make a decision as to whether further action(s) are necessary. The awarding body may decide to investigate further. Sanctions will depend on the severity of individual cases. It is possible that the awarding body will impose a range of sanctions:-

• Sanctions for individual staff members/Centres

• Learner(s) debarred,

• Withdrawal of certificates, etc.

 

 

 

 

Stage 8: Actions:-

When all the information is processed and the process is complete an evaluation into what went wrong and what can be done to prevent future incidents occurring. Any resultant action plan will be implemented and monitored appropriately.

 

 

 

Both centres, staff and learners have the right to appeal against decisions.

 

Records of investigations need to be kept.

 

Relevant forms for each of the stage of the investigation can be found by contacting Hornbill Industrial Training Ltd