Academic integrity

Cycle of respect, accountability, trust, fairness, honestyThis content was last updated in April 2024

Academic integrity, honesty, and a respect for knowledge, truth and ethical practices are fundamental to the business of the University.

Five values form the basis of academic integrity:

  • honesty
  • fairness
  • trust
  • responsibility
  • respect

All members of the University community are required to uphold these values and comply with the University of Newcastle Code of Conduct in all of their activities.

To preserve the quality of learning, the University may impose severe sanctions on activities that undermine academic integrity.

To assist in any future conversations about how particular assessments have been crafted or developed, all students are advised to retain copies of drafts/versions of submissions.  This message should be reinforced in course level discussions around assessments.

Policies

Academic integrity is not merely a set of rules to follow, but a reflection of the inherent value found in the pursuit of knowledge. It's an invitation to engage deeply and authentically with the educational journey. However, the University does have policies that describe or rights and expectations in relation to ethical academic conduct:

The University Code of Conduct

Academic Integrity and Ethical Academic Conduct Policy

The Student Conduct Rule

Oral Examination (VIVA) Procedure

Academic misconduct

The Tertiary Education Quality Standards Authority describes 6 behaviours that may result in intentional and accidental academic breaches.

Plagiarism

Submitting work that is not your own without acknowledging, citing or referencing the original source of the work, is known as plagiarism.

It doesn’t matter whether you do this accidentally or on purpose, whether you change the words to make them your own or simply copy and paste.

When you are using another person’s thoughts and ideas, you must reference the source material.

Recycling or resubmitting work

Recycling involves submitting (or resubmitting) work that has already been assessed, without your teacher’s permission.

For example, submitting a report that you were graded on in a first-year class as part of your work in a third-year class. If you want to build on your previous work, you should discuss this first with your Course Coordinator.

Fabricating information

Fabrication involves making up information for research-focused assessment tasks, such as experimental or interview data.

It can also include inventing sources of data, evidence or ideas by citing publications that are incorrect or that simply don’t exist.

Collusion

Collusion involves engaging in illegitimate cooperation with one or more other students to complete assessable work. This is different to working on group assignments that are set by your teachers.

Examples of illegitimate cooperation include working with a friend or group of friends to write an essay or report that is meant to be an individual piece of work. It can also include sharing quiz or test questions and answers with other students, as well as written assignments like reports and essays.

Exam cheating

Exam cheating includes:

  • writing unapproved ‘cheat notes’ on your body or materials you take into the exam room;
  • attempting to copy from other students;
  • communicating with other students or people outside the exam venue while the exam is in progress;
  • using electronic devices to access information related to the exam while it is in progress;
  • bringing prohibited items, such as unapproved calculators or textbooks into exams

Contract cheating and impersonation

Contract cheating is a type of illegal commercial cheating.

It involves getting someone else to complete part or all of your work and then submitting the work as if you had completed it yourself.

This can include asking someone else to sit an exam for you or having them write an essay, report or some other kind of assignment, which is sometimes referred to as 'ghost-writing'.

Actions that support illegal contract cheating services are also considered breaches of academic integrity.

Academic Integrity Module (AIM)

All students need to complete the University's Academic Integrity Module (AIM) annually. This is an online module and quiz that is available through Canvas.

AIM must be completed before the end of a student's first annual enrolment period (Trimester, Semester, or block). Successful completion will be automatically recorded against their academic record in NUSTAR. If they do not complete AIM in the designated time frame, they will not be able to re-enrol, view grades or transcripts, or graduate.

For more information, view the guides at Service Now – AIM.

Student Academic Conduct Officers

Student Academic Conduct Officers (SACOs) provide teaching staff with the support required to ensure transparency and consistency for both students and staff in determining key standards in academic literacy and ethics. SACOs are guided by the provisions of the Student Academic Integrity and Ethical Academic Conduct Policy and Student Conduct Rule.

The role of the SACO is to support and maintain academic standards when misconduct is suspected. Communication between the SACOs contributes to consistency in approach to academic integrity across the University.

Oral Examination (Viva)

Course Coordinators may need to perform an Oral Examination (Viva) with a student as a way to both verify the authorship of materials and as a quality assurance measure.

An Oral Examination (Viva) is a way to demonstrate alignment of a student's performance and to reflect on assessment processes. A student should perform at a similar standard in an Oral Examination (Viva) to that in other assessment forms. A student's performance in an Oral Examination (Viva) should demonstrate they understand the material at a level that is similar with that demonstrated in the related assessment task. An oral examination provides the student with an opportunity to better explain material subject to assessment, and to demonstrate their knowledge and competence.

If a Course Coordinator has concerns regarding the authorship of a student's work following an Oral Examination (Viva) this matter can be referred to the relevant SACO.

For more information you can read the the Oral Examination (Viva) Procedure.

Turnitin

  • Written assessments, submitted via Canvas, can be enabled to go through Turnitin.
  • Turnitin software checks for similarities and matches by comparing submissions to academic and online content.
  • Students must ensure originality and proper citation. We encourage enabling students to have multiple submission attempts prior to the due date for them to review their own similarity report and learn proper referencing technique
  • Any similarities found will be highlighted for instructor review.

Turnitin is the University's text matching software. This academic support tool gives students and staff the ability to submit assignments and view an originality report.

Turnitin compares against their database, which includes both current and archived content from the internet, a repository of works other students have submitted, and a collection of documents comprising periodicals, journals and publications.

It is a condition of enrolment that students accept that electronic text-matching software may be used to check their work. To enable Turnitin to check a student submission, staff need to set up a link to for each Turnitin assignment in Canvas so students are able to pre-submit their work and make revisions based on the originality report.

Please note that originality reports generated by Turnitin should be interpreted by the assessor. Judgement about whether or not plagiarism has occurred can't be based solely on the percentage of matching text that is found.

For more information see Turnitin in Canvas and  Using Turnitin more effectively – staff guide.

Artificial Intelligence and Academic Integrity

  • Work submitted by students for assessment must be their original work.
  • Course Coordinators should provide students with clear instructions on what constitutes acceptable use of generative artificial intelligence in assessment tasks.
  • From time to time, Course Coordinators may wish to discuss the construction of an assessment with students. Students should be advised to retain drafts/versions of your progress prior to submission. See How do I turn on AutoSave? and View previous versions of a file for Microsoft products such as Excel, PowerPoint or Word.
  • Acknowledgement is key. If students are permitted to use generative artificial intelligence in an assessment, this use should be correctly referenced.
  • Turnitin’s Artificial Intelligence detection software may ​be used to review written work submitted for assessment. See more at Tips to Identify AI-Generated Content in Written Work.

    • Students must be familiar with expectations regarding academic integrity and the use of artificial intelligence in assessment . Misuse of AI tools may be considered a breach of the University's Student Conduct Rule and could result in disciplinary action

Acceptable Use

Information about communicating your expectations to students is available on the Artificial Intelligence Working Group SharePoint site.

Not permitted

Not permitted

For some assessment tasks, Course Coordinators may advise students that they are not permitted to use any form of generative artificial intelligence. This includes, but is not limited to, AI writing assistants (such as Grammarly), content generators, or AI-based problem-solving tools.

Any use of artificial intelligence will be considered academic misconduct, and may result in penalties.

Somewhat permitted

Somewhat permitted

In some assessment tasks, Course Coordinator may allow students to choose to use generative AI to aid in them assignment preparation. In such cases, students should provide a transparent account of its use (through appropriate referencing).

Examples may include using generative AI for preliminary research, brainstorming, drafting and structuring, or editing purposes.

Expected

Expected

Some assessment tasks may require that students incorporate generative AI as a key component of their work. Course Coordinators should describe the tools that should (or should not be used) and how they should be used.

In such cases students should provide a transparent account of its use (through appropriate referencing).

What about Grammarly

Language editing tools, such as Grammarly, can be useful for students wanting to improve the expression of academic writing. However, the use of such tools may not always be appropriate (for example, in an assessment focused on particularly on students writing skills) and it is important that you are clear about your expectations for their use.

In particular, GrammarlyGo (the generative Artificial Intelligence tool embedded within Grammarly) should only be used if you are expressly permitting use of generative artificial intelligence in the assessment. If AI is not allowed in a particular assessment, students should make sure that the GrammarlyGo feature is turned off in your customisation settings by using the following instructions.

Turnitin’s Artificial Intelligence Detection may flag use of Grammarly (or GrammarlyGo) in written submissions but does not necessarily mean the student has engaged in academic misconduct. Drafts/versions of student work can be a useful part of any discussions around the students learning and assessment.

For more information see: