1 Introduction Anglia Ruskin University Assessment Offences 1. As an academic community, London School of Marketing recognises that the principles of truth, honesty and mutual respect are central to the pursuit of knowledge. Behaviour that undermines these principles weakens the community, both individually and collectively, and diminishes our values. Anglia Ruskin is committed to ensuring that every student and member of staff is made aware of the responsibilities s/he bears in maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and how those standards are protected. 2. This section of the Academic Regulations describes London School of Marketing s policy for managing an alleged assessment offence by students registered for an undergraduate or postgraduate award conferred by London School of Marketing, including all students registered at a UK or international local study campus, students registered on online or Blended Learning courses. 3. We are required to forward to the Director of the Academic Office of Anglia Ruskin University (or nominee) any case of an alleged assessment offence by a student enrolled on an Anglia Ruskin Top-Up course for investigation by Anglia Ruskin University. Such students are subject to the Academic Regulations of Anglia Ruskin University. 4. This policy has been approved by the board of London School of Marketing Ltd. 5. The Senate has approved procedures for dealing with an alleged assessment offence and these are conducted under the auspices of the Academic Regulations Subcommittee which is formally responsible for the investigation of all such cases. Through its Chair (or nominee), the Subcommittee establishes a Panel to hear each case, where appropriate, chaired by a member of the Subcommittee. 6. The consideration of an alleged assessment offence, determining whether such an offence has occurred and the determination of any penalty that is required if an allegation is upheld is not a matter for the relevant awarding body. Once the process for an alleged assessment offence case has been concluded, the awarding body merely implements the outcome of the process with regard to the student s academic profile. 7. The Academic Department maintains a record of all assessment offences and penalties and presents this information to the Board on an annual basis. 8. The principal method of communication with a student throughout the assessment offences process is the student s Anglia Ruskin account and e-vision (the latter is used for the official publication of outcomes and results related to the assessment process). Written letters are sent as attachments. Communication is not conducted via postal services expect for the issuing of Completion of Procedures Letters in accordance with procedures for the Office of the Independent Adjudicator (see Regulation below).
2 9. If the behaviour of student becomes threatening or abusive during Stage 1 or Stage 2 of the process detailed below, then the Director of Academic Compliance or Panel Chair respectively is empowered to suspend the process and refer the matter to the Board of Directors. The process may resume at a later date, pending the outcome of the disciplinary process. Definitions 10. Assessment Offence For the purpose of these Academic Regulations an assessment offence is the generic term used to define cases where a student(s) has sought to gain unfair academic advantage in the assessment process for him/herself or another student(s) An assessment offence may be committed in relation to work undertaken for any assessment method used by London School of Marketing and its awarding bodies, or by Anglia Ruskin University. There are many forms of assessment offence including (this is not an exhaustive list): Any relevant breaches of the Anglia Ruskin Academic Regulations governing the Conduct of Anglia Ruskin Examinations; Any relevant breaches of the Student Learning Agreement or Terms and Conditions of London School of Marketing Limited governing conduct in respect of assessments; taking unauthorised material into the examination room; impersonating another student; causing any disturbance (and continues to do so after warning) such as disruption caused by a mobile telephone, shouting, talking, whispering, eating and/or drinking; submitting someone else s work as one s own (known as plagiarism : see below for a definition); falsifying data; obtaining an examination paper or access to an online assessment in advance of its authorised release; the unauthorised and unattributed submission of an assessment item which has been produced by another student or person; the behaviour of one or more students which may result in the poor academic performance of another student or students; any attempt to bribe or provide inducements to members of London School of Marketing staff, or to internal or external examiners in relation to the assessment process in its entirety; any attempt which, if enacted, is designed to undermine or breach the Student Learning Agreement, Terms and Conditions, or Anglia Ruskin University Academic Regulations
3 11. Multiple Concurrent Offences For the purpose of these Academic Regulations, multiple concurrent offences are cases where a student has committed more than one offence of the same nature within the same semester or trimester AND where the process for considering the former offence(s) has not been concluded (at either Stage 1 or Stage 2) by the time the student undertakes/submits the latter assessment task(s) where an offence is committed. In such cases multiple concurrent offences (which may extend over one or more modules) are regarded as a single offence for the purpose of this regulation. 12. Plagiarism and collusion are common forms of assessment offence. They are defined as follows: Plagiarism Plagiarism is the submission of an item of assessment containing elements of work produced by another person(s) in such a way that it could be assumed to be the student s own work. Examples of plagiarism are: the verbatim copying of another person s work without acknowledgement; the close paraphrasing of another person s work by simply changing a few words or altering the order of presentation without acknowledgement; the unacknowledged quotation of phrases from another person s work and/or the presentation of another person s idea(s) as one s own Copying or close paraphrasing with occasional acknowledgement of the source may also be deemed to be plagiarism if the absence of quotation marks implies that the phraseology is the student s own Plagiarised work may belong to another student or be (purchased) from a published source such as a book, report, journal or material available on the internet Collusion Collusion occurs when two or more individuals collaborate to produce a piece of work to be submitted (in whole or in part) for assessment and the work is presented as the work of one student alone If students in a class are instructed or encouraged to work together in the pursuit of an assignment, such group activity is regarded as approved collaboration. However, if there is a requirement for the submitted work to be solely that of the individual, joint authorship is not permitted. Students who, improperly, work collectively in these circumstances are guilty of collusion.
4 Initial Reporting of an Assessment Offence 13. Any suspicion of an assessment offence during the marking process for assessed work which is not a formal examination is reported to the Module Leader, who in turn reports it to the Academic Department within 20 working days of the original submission (or extended) deadline for consideration under paras 12 and 13 below. 14. An allegation of an assessment offence which is brought to the attention of the Faculty s Director of Studies after 20 working days69 have passed since the original submission (or extended) deadline can only be progressed if new evidence which leads to the allegation emerges that was not previously available. The Faculty Director of Studies must be satisfied that a case for progressing the allegation exists, based only on the new evidence. 15. On occasion, an allegation pursued under Regulation above may, if proven, require the retraction of credit previously awarded for the module(s) in question. In such cases, the Chair of the Academic Regulations Subcommittee seeks the authority of the Vice-Chancellor (as the Chair of the Senate) to retract the credit and amend the student s academic record accordingly. 16. A student whom an invigilator believes to be using unfair means during a formal examination (including unauthorised aids, copying or communicating with others) is so informed and his/her answer book marked at the appropriate place. Unless the candidate is required to leave the examination room for any other reason, he/she is permitted to continue the examination and a report is made by the invigilator to the Academic Department at the end of the examination who then forward this to the Director of Academic Compliance. 17. The Director of Studies is responsible for determining if there is sufficient evidence that an assessment offence has occurred and, in so doing, determines the nature of the formal allegation to be put to the student (eg: plagiarism, collusion etc.). In reaching this conclusion, the Director of Studies may consult the Chair of the Academic Regulations Subcommittee who may ask a member of the Subcommittee (who is not a member of the Faculty concerned) to consider the issue and provide a second opinion to the Director of Studies. 18. Where the Director of Studies believes that no assessment offence of any nature has occurred, a formal allegation is not made against the student and no further action is taken. For assessed work at levels 3 and 4, the Director of Studies may deem a student s first allegation of plagiarism or collusion to be an example of poor academic practice70. In such cases, the student receives appropriate academic counselling at this point from the Module Leader or Module Tutor rather than the allegation progressing further. The piece of work is marked appropriately (including the possibility of a fail mark) to take account of the poor academic practice. 19. The Director of Studies maintains a record of students who receive academic counselling for poor academic practice to avoid any subsequent allegations of plagiarism or collusion being wrongly considered as a first allegation of plagiarism or collusion.
5 20. If a student s first allegation of plagiarism or collusion occurs at levels 5, 6 or 7, it cannot be considered as poor academic practice. Additionally, an alleged assessment offence that occurs in an examination situation cannot be considered as poor academic practice at any level of study. 13. The Academic Manager responsible for the course (CIM/CAM, EduQual, ARU Top-up) Compliance is responsible for determining if a prima facie case exists against the student. In reaching this conclusion, the Academic Manager may consult with the Director of Academic Compliance and, where appropriate, with a representative of Anglia Ruskin University to consider the issue and provide a second opinion to Academic Manager. 14. Where the Academic Manager believes there is no case to answer, the allegation is dropped and no further formal action is taken. 21. If the Academic Manager is satisfied that a prima facie case does exist, the allegation progresses to Stage 1: a full investigation by the College. Stage 1: College Investigation 22. Within 20 working days of the alleged assessment offence being brought to the attention of the Academic Manager, he/she informs the student of the exact nature of the alleged assessment offence in writing and sends the student copies of relevant documentary evidence detailed below (to both their term-time and home addresses) by recorded delivery, asking for a response to the allegation within 15 working days (20 if to an address outside of the UK, including international local study campuses) of the date of the letter (the response may constitute a meeting between the Academic Manager and the student to discuss the allegation further): evidence of the original source materials; the student s work cross-referenced against the source materials; brief written statements from staff bringing the allegation. 23. If the student admits to the offence, the Academic Manager confirms the assessment offence and appropriate penalty, as prescribed in paragraphs 44-45, to the Director of Academic Compliance (or nominee). Formal notification of the penalty is communicated to the student, in writing, by the Director of Academic Compliance and is copied to the student s file. The student s academic record on our, and where appropriate Anglia Ruskin University s student record systems, is amended accordingly (but no reference to the assessment offence appears on the academic transcript).
6 24. If no response is received from the student within 15 working days (20 if notice was sent to an address outside of the UK, including international local study campuses) of the date of the letter, the student is deemed as not contesting the allegation and, therefore, admitting to the offence and the process outlined in paragraph 17 is applied. 25. In all cases where a student admits (or fails to respond) to the allegation as a first offence the student is interviewed by the Director of Academic Compliance (or a nominee), is told of the seriousness of the offence and receives advice on good academic practice and the accepted conventions in the preparation of their work in whatever form it takes. 26. If the student denies the alleged assessment offence the matter is referred to Stage 2: a Panel hearing, which is conducted in accordance with paragraphs 21 4 below. Stage 2: Panel Hearing 27. If a student has denied an alleged assessment offence presented by the Academic Manager, the Chair of the Academic Regulations Subcommittee convenes a Panel to hear the allegation to give the student an opportunity to demonstrate that the offence has not occurred. 28. The Academic Office is responsible for arranging and servicing Panel hearings. The Panel comprises: The Director of Academic Compliance (who acts as Chair); A member of academic staff of London School of Marketing who is not responsible for the course on which the student is registered nor has taught the student or in any other way have been closely associated with the student; A student nominated by the President of the Students Union in consultation with the Executive Secretary; The Director of the Academic Compliance (or nominee) also minutes the Panel meeting and deliberations. In addition, the following have the right to be in attendance: the President of the Students Union (or an elected representative of the Students Union); the presenter(s) of the case (Module Leader (where appropriate) and Academic Manager or nominee); the student whose case is being heard and his/her friend or a representative of the Students Union. 29. Neither London School of Marketing nor the student whose case is being heard is legally represented during the conduct of a hearing.
7 30. The Panel hearing is formal in nature and takes place as soon as possible and no later than three months after the formal allegation is first made in writing to the student. 31. London School of Marketing reserves the right to involve such other individuals at the hearing as it thinks appropriate to the presentation of the case. 32. The hearing is conducted in the following sequence: Academic Manager (or nominee) presenting the allegation with a view to demonstrating that the offence has occurred. The evidence may be in writing and/or witnesses may be called; witnesses in support of the allegation; the student (or his/her friend) with a view to rejecting the allegation and demonstrating that the offence has not occurred. The evidence may be in writing and/or witnesses may be called; witnesses in support of the student; final statement by Academic Manager (or nominee) and his/her witnesses; final statement by student (or his/her friend) who is the subject of the allegation. 33. The members of the Panel have the right to put questions to any person attending the Hearing. 34. The Academic Manager (or nominee) and witnesses, the student who is the subject of the allegation and his/her friend, have the right to be present during the taking of evidence. All have the right to put questions to the witnesses and to each other, except that neither has the right to put questions on the others' final statements. 35. If the student who is the subject of the allegation does not appear at the hearing, the Panel may proceed to deal with the allegation in his/her absence provided the Panel membership is satisfied that the student has received proper and timely notification of the Panel hearing. 36. In reaching its decision, the Panel sits in private and considers whether the case has been proved. After the Panel has reached a conclusion, the outcome is verbally communicated to the student at the end of proceedings. 37. If the Panel concludes that the case has not been proved, the allegation is dismissed and no further action is taken. 38. If the Panel concludes that an assessment offence has been proved, the appropriate penalty, as prescribed in paragraphs 44 45, is
8 implemented. 39. The Director of Academic Compliance notifies the student of the Panel s conclusion, in writing, within ten working days of the Panel hearing. This notification also highlights that, under paragraphs 46-48, the student has the right to appeal to the Board of Directors against the outcome of the Panel hearing within ten working days of the date of the letter. 40. If the student has not exercised their right to appeal to the Directors by the deadline set by the Director of Academic Compliance, he formally confirms the outcome of the Panel hearing to the student in writing within ten working days of the deadline and this is copied to the student s file and Director of Academic Compliance. The student s academic record on our, and where appropriate on Anglia Ruskin s, student record system is amended accordingly (but no reference to the assessment offence appears on the academic transcript). 41. If the student indicates his/her wish to submit an appeal the Director of Academic Compliance informs the Directors within three working days. 42. In all cases where an assessment offence is proved at a Panel hearing, the student is subsequently interviewed by the Director of Academic Compliance (or a nominee) and told of the seriousness of the offence. If relevant to the offence, the student receives advice on good academic practice and the accepted conventions in the preparation of their work in whatever form it takes. 43. A report of the hearing is submitted to the Registry Department for information. Penalties 44. A range of penalties exist which are implemented according to: the academic level at which the offence occurred; whether the offence occurred at the initial assessment or re-assessment stage of a module; whether the offence is admitted by the student during Stage 1 of the Assessment Offences process or the offence is proved through a Panel hearing during Stage 2 of the Assessments Offences process. 45. Table A at the end of this section of this policy details the penalties to be implemented for assessment offences admitted by the student (during Stage 1 of the process). All elements of each penalty are applied equally on all occasions.
9 46. Table B at the end of this section of the Academic Regulations details the penalties to be implemented for assessment offences proven by a Panel hearing (during Stage 2 of the process). All elements of each penalty are applied equally on all occasions. 47. The count of the number of assessment offences for a student does not continue for separate registrations between an undergraduate and a postgraduate course. In such cases, the count is reset to zero for a student registered on a postgraduate course irrespective of any assessment offences committed in a previous registration on an undergraduate course73. The count is maintained for separate registrations on courses at the same (undergraduate or postgraduate) level In cases where the prescribed penalty is the recommended expulsion of the student, the Director of Academic Compliance is required to present the recommendation to the Directors who consider the request. 49. If during Stage 1 or 2 of the process, the student provides evidence of mitigating circumstances that he/she asserts directly led to the assessment offence being committed, such information does NOT impact on the either the Director of Academic Compliance or the Panel s decision as to whether or not the assessment offence has occurred. However, if the Director of Academic Compliance (during Stage 1) or Panel (during Stage 2) believes that, as a result of the mitigating circumstances, the prescribed penalty is exceptionally inappropriate, the Director of Academic Compliance (following consultation with two other Directors of Studies) or the Panel can, at his/her/its discretion, review the default penalty and propose an alternative penalty in light of the mitigating circumstances presented by the student. The application of an alternative penalty must be supported by relevant documentary evidence. The Director of Academic Compliance monitors the extent to which such discretion is exercised. 50. Formal notification of the conclusion of the assessment offences procedure, including details of any penalty, is made to the student, in writing, by the Academic Manager. 51. Table A Level of Study First Offence Second Offence Third or Subsequent Offence Assessment Re-Assessment Assessment Re-Assessment 5-6 Mark of 0% awarded and overall module result of Fail Resubmission permitted as reassessment; Mark of 0% awarded and overall module result of Fail No resubmission is Mark of 0% awarded and overall module result of Fail Resubmission Mark of 0% awarded and overall module result of Fail No resubmission is Recommended Expulsion
10 module result capped at 40% Capped module result compulsorily included in classification calculation If the student fails the module on reassessment, the module result (if passed) for any retake or replacement module (if permitted) is capped at 40% Warning letter is placed on record in student file Academic counselling Academic permitted (student therefore fails module) Module result (if passed) for any retake or replacement module (if permitted) is capped at 40% Module result compulsorily included in classification calculation Warning letter is placed on record in student file Academic counselling permitted as reassessment; module result capped at 40% Capped module result compulsorily included in classification calculation AND final classification calculation reduced by 5 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) If the student fails the module on reassessment, the module result (if passed) for any retake or replacement module (if permitted) is capped at 40% and is compulsorily included in classification calculation For unclassified awards only, deferral of conferment of award by six months permitted (student therefore fails module) If a student fails a module in which they have committed an assessment offence, the module result (if passed) for any retake or replacement module (if permitted) is capped at 40% Module result compulsorily included in classification calculation AND classification reduced by 5 percentage points (this may result in a lower award classification but not a failed award) For unclassified awards only, deferral of conferment of award by six months Warning letter is placed on record in student file Academic counselling Warning letter is placed on record in student file Academic counselling 7 Mark of 0% awarded and overall module result of Fail Resubmission permitted Mark of 0% awarded and overall module result of Fail No resubmission is Recommended Expulsion Recommended Expulsion Recommended Expulsion
11 as reassessment; module result capped at 40% Capped module result compulsorily included in classification calculation AND classification reduced by 5 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) If student fails the module on resubmission/reassessment, the module result (if passed) for any retake or replacement module (if permitted) is capped at 40% and is compulsorily included in classification calculation For unclassified awards only, conferment of award is deferred for six months Warning letter is placed on record in student file permitted (student therefore fails module) Module result for any retake or replacement module (if permitted under the Academic Regulations) is capped at 40% AND classification reduced by 5 percentage points (this may result in a lower award classification but not a failed award) For unclassified awards only, conferment of award is deferred for six months Warning letter is placed on record in student file Academic counselling Academic counselling
12 52. Table B Level of Study First Offence Second Offence Third or Subsequent Offence Assessment Re-Assessment Assessment Re-Assessment 5-6 As for Stage 1 and: the arithmetic mean resulting from the calculation of the award classification is reduced by 5 percentage points (this may result in a lower award classification but not a failed award) if the award is not classified, thereby precluding use of the penalty of a lower award classification, conferment of the award is deferred for six months 7 As for Stage 1 except that the arithmetic mean resulting from the calculation of the award classification is reduced by 10 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) As for Stage 1 and: the arithmetic mean resulting from the calculation of the award classification is reduced by 5 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) if the award is not classified, thereby precluding use of the penalty of a lower award classification, conferment of the award is deferred for six months As for Stage 1 except that the arithmetic mean resulting from the calculation of the award classification is reduced by 10 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) As for Stage 1 except that the arithmetic mean resulting from the calculation of the award classification is reduced by 10 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) As for Stage 1 except that the arithmetic mean resulting from the calculation of the award classification is reduced by 10 percentage points (this may result in a lower award failed award) As for Stage 1 As for Stage 1 As for Stage 1 As for Stage 1
13 Appeals Arising From Panel Hearing 53. A student may appeal against the outcome of a Panel hearing to the Board if an alleged assessment offence has been upheld and there is evidence that the procedures for considering the allegation were not followed. There are no grounds for appeal on the basis of the following: new evidence (unless pertaining to procedures) not disclosed at the hearing for whatever reason; disputing the academic judgement of the Panel; disputing the competence of Panel members. 54. Any appeal must be confirmed by the student to the Director of Academic Compliance as Chairman of the original Panel hearing within ten working days of the date of the letter that confirms the Panel s decision to the student. By the same deadline, the student must specify, in writing, precise details of those aspects of the procedures that were not followed and which therefore form the basis of the appeal. The Director of Academic Compliance informs the Company Secretary (or his nominee) to the Directors of the student s intention to appeal against the Panel s decision, and forwards the written submission from the student which details the basis of the appeal, within three working days. 55. The Company Secretary or his nominee convenes an Appeals Committee of the Board of Directors to consider the appeal. Office of the Independent Adjudicator 56. If a student is not satisfied with the decision of the Panel of the Appeals Committee of the Board of Governors, he/she may make representation to the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education.
SOAS Student Disciplinary Procedure 2016/17 1 Introduction and general principles 1.1 Persons registering as students of SOAS become members of the School and as such commit themselves to abiding by its
DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES Student Misconduct & Professional Conduct Policy and Procedures The School s disciplinary procedures are currently under review and we are in the process of consulting with staff
London School of Economics and Political Science Purpose of this Procedure Disciplinary Procedure for Students 1. The School s Memorandum and Articles of Association set out its main objectives of education
IUPUI Office of Student Conduct Disciplinary Procedures for Alleged Violations of Personal Misconduct Preamble IUPUI disciplinary procedures determine responsibility and appropriate consequences for violations
ST PHILIP S CE PRIMARY SCHOOL Staff Disciplinary Procedures Policy Policy confirmed by the Governing Body of St Philip s CE Primary School on: Date: January 2016 Signature: (Chair of Governors) To be reviewed
Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech Rev Date Purpose of Issue / Description of Change Equality Impact Assessment Completed 1. October 2011 Initial Issue 2. 8 th June 2015 Revision version 2 28 th July
UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM CODE OF PRACTICE ON LEAVE OF ABSENCE PROCEDURE 1 Index of points 1. Introduction 2. Definition of Leave of Absence 3. Implications of Leave of Absence 4. Imposed Leave of Absence
BISHOP BAVIN SCHOOL POLICY ON LEARNER DISCIPLINE AND DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES 1. Introduction (Created January 2015) There are many factors and applicable legislation that need to be considered in the application
University Policy University Procedure Instructions/Forms Integrity in Scholarly Activity Policy Classification Research Approval Authority General Faculties Council Implementation Authority Provost and
Exclusions Policy Policy reviewed: May 2016 Policy review date: May 2018 OAT Model Policy 1 Contents Action to be invoked by Senior Staff in Serious Disciplinary Matters 1. When a serious incident occurs,
RHODES UNIVERSITY COMMON FACULTY POLICY AND PROCEDURES ON PLAGIARISM 1. POLICY PARTICULARS DATE OF APPROVAL BY RELEVANT COMMITTEE STRUCTURE: May 2008 DATE OF APPROVAL BY SENATE: May 2008 DATE OF APPROVAL
1 PUTRA BUSINESS SCHOOL (GRADUATE STUDIES RULES) TABLE OF CONTENTS PART 1 PRELIMINARY NO. CONTENT PAGE 1. Citation and Commencement 4 2. Definitions and Interpretations 4 PART 2 STUDY PROGRAMMES 3. Types
University of Exeter College of Humanities Assessment Procedures 2010/11 This document describes the conventions and procedures used to assess, progress and classify UG students within the College of Humanities.
The University of British Columbia Board of Governors Policy No.: 85 Approval Date: January 1995 Last Revision: April 2013 Responsible Executive: Vice-President, Research Title: Scholarly Integrity Background
1 Rules 1.1 There shall be a degree which may be awarded an overall grade. The award of the grade shall be made for meritorious performance in the program, with greatest weight given to completion of the
University of Michigan - Flint POLICY ON FACULTY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND CONFLICTS OF COMMITMENT A. Identification of Potential Conflicts of Interest and Commitment Potential conflicts of interest and
03-1 Please note that this document is a non-binding convenience translation. Only the German version of the document entitled "Studien- und Prüfungsordnung der Juristischen Fakultät der Universität Heidelberg
Southeast Arkansas College 1900 Hazel Street Pine Bluff, Arkansas 71603 www.seark.edu (870) 543-5900 Version 1.3.0, 28 July 2015 Concurrent Credit Student Handbook 2015/16 Table of Contents What is Concurrent
Chapter 2 University Structure 2. UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE STRUCTURE This chapter provides details of the membership and terms of reference of Senate, the University s senior academic committee, and its Standing
Degree Regulations and Programmes of Study Undergraduate Degree Programme Regulations 2017/18 A General Undergraduate Degree Regulations Compliance 1 Compliance and concessions 2 Head of College authority
Annex to the SGH Senate Resolution no.590 of 22 February 2012 Rules and Regulations of Doctoral Studies at the Warsaw School of Economics Preliminary provisions 1 1. Rules and Regulations of doctoral studies
Examination Regulations for the Masters Degree Program in Applied Neurosciences in Sports & Exercise in the Faculty of Natural Sciences at Paderborn University of xx.xx.xxxx On the basis of Section 2 para.
MANCHESTER METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY FACULTYOF EDUCATION THE SECONDARY EDUCATION TRAINING PARTNERSHIP MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING 2017-18 THE SECONDARY EDUCATION TRAINING PARTNERSHIP MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Do More, Learn More, BE MORE! By teaching, coaching and encouraging our students, Tamwood Language Centres helps students to develop their talents, achieve their educational goals and realize their potential.
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION REGULATIONS PURPOSE The Virginia Supreme Court has established, by Rule of Court, a mandatory continuing legal education program in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which
(Revised September 1, 2017) I. General Provisions Non-Academic Disciplinary Procedures A. Purpose The University Non-Academic Disciplinary Procedures are designed to facilitate fact-finding and to review
HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL AND HARVARD SCHOOL OF DENTAL MEDICINE PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING COMPLAINTS OF DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT, OR UNPROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIPS AND ABUSE OF AUTHORITY I. STATEMENTS OF POLICY
Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools Table of Contents I. Scope and Authority...49 Rule 1: Scope and Purpose... 49 Rule 2: Council Responsibility and Authority with Regard to Accreditation Status...
WOODBRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL EXAM POLICY 2017-2018 The 11-19 Exam Policy The purpose of this exam policy is: to ensure the planning and management of exams is conducted efficiently and in the best interest of
Policy Name: Students Rights, Responsibilities, and Disciplinary Procedures Approval Authority: RBHS Chancellor Originally Issued: 06/07/1995 Revisions: 1/10/2010, 4/22/2013 1. Who Should Read This Policy
Idsall External Examinations Policy Sponsorship & Review 1 Sponsor Mr D Crichton, Deputy Headteacher 2 Written and Approved October 2014 3 Next Review Date October 2016 This policy should be read in conjunction
Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Navitas UK Holdings Ltd April 2016 Contents About this review... 1 Key findings... 2 QAA's judgements about... 2 Good practice... 2 Theme: Digital Literacies...
POLICY ON THE ACCREDITATION OF PRIOR CERTIFICATED AND EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING 1. Definitions The term Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL) covers a range of prior learning experiences. For the purpose of
POLICY ON SCHOLARLY INTEGRITY (Pursuant to the Framework Agreement) University Policy No.: AC1105 (B) Classification: Academic and Students Approving Authority: Board of Governors Effective Date: December/12
Discrimination Complaints/Sexual Harassment Original Implementation: September 1990/February 2, 1982 Last Revision: July 17, 2012 General Policy Guidelines 1. Purpose: To provide an educational and working
International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme Roots Millennium Schools Academic Honesty Policy Rationale Roots Millennium Schools maintains academic honesty at the very core of teaching and learning. All
eligibility to attempt part 2 Examination and successful completion of the part 2 examination policy FAculty of Clinical Radiology THE ROYAL AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND COLLEGE OF RADIOLOGISTS Eligibility
Bachelor of International Hospitality Management, BA IHM Course curriculum 2016-2018 August 2016 0 INDHOLD 1. curriculum framework... 4 1.1. Objective of the study programme... 4 1.2. Title and duration...
Grading System IE-SMU MBA With the aim of encouraging students to reach their full potential in a healthy competitive environment and to obtain a rigorous information about their performance during the
ASHMOLE ACADEMY Admissions Appeals Booklet 2017 Ashmole Academy is its own Admissions Authority. Appeals are, therefore, made directly to the school. This booklet explains how you can make an appeal if
Navitas UK Holdings Ltd Embedded College Review for Educational Oversight by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education February 2014 Annex: Birmingham City University International College Introduction
QUEEN ELIZABETH S SCHOOL Admissions Criteria and Information a Guide for Parents September 2017 Admissions Queen Elizabeth s School Queen s Road, Barnet, Hertfordshire, EN5 4DQ Telephone Number 020 8441
University of Massachusetts Amherst Graduate School PLEASE READ BEFORE FILLING OUT THE RESIDENCY RECLASSIFICATION APPEAL FORM The residency reclassification officers responsible for determining Massachusetts
Accreditation of Prior Experiential and Certificated Learning (APECL) Guidance for Applicants/Students The following guidance notes set provide an overview for applicants and students in relation to making
REGULATIONS RELATING TO ADMISSION, STUDIES AND EXAMINATION AT THE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF SOUTHEAST NORWAY Authorisation: Passed by the Joint Board at the University College of Southeast Norway on 18 December
REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDY September 2013 - i - REGULATIONS FOR POSTGRADUATE RESEARCH STUDY Approved by CIT Academic Council, April 2013 - ii - TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION: THE RESEARCH
Revised: 5/2017 Nashville State Community College Business & Applied Arts Visual Communications / Photography PHO 1110 Basic Photography for Photographers 3 credit hours An introduction to the fundamentals
Education Act 1983 (Consolidated to No 13 of 1995) [lxxxiv] Education Act 1983, INDEPENDENT STATE OF PAPUA NEW GUINEA. Being an Act to provide for the National Education System and to make provision (a)
UNIVERSITY OF DAR-ES-SALAAM OFFICE OF VICE CHANCELLOR-ACADEMIC DIRECTORATE OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIUES GUIDELINES AND REGULATIONS FOR PLAGIARISM AND DEPLOYMENT OF POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS FOR TEACHING OR TECHNICAL
MMU/MAN: 502001 MASINDE MULIRO UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY EXAMINATION HANDBOOK 2014 2019 2 VISION To be a centre of Excellence in Science and Technology responsive to development needs of society
THE UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES Faculty of Medical Sciences, Mona Regulations MB BS Medical Undergraduate Programme (including the degree of B Med Sci) 1. Entry Requirements...5 2. Qualifications for
University of Baltimore VI-1.12 Librarian Policy on Promotion and Permanent Status Approved by University Faculty Senate 2/11/09 Approved by Attorney General s Office 2/12/09 Approved by Provost 2/24/09
300-37 Administrative Procedure 360 STUDENT ASSESSMENT, EVALUATION AND PROMOTION Background Maintaining a comprehensive system of student assessment and evaluation is an integral component of the teaching-learning
COMM370, Social Media Advertising Fall 2017 Lecture Instructor Office Hours Monday at 4:15 6:45 PM, Room 003 School of Communication Jing Yang, firstname.lastname@example.org, 223A School of Communication Friday 2:00-4:00
Graduate Student Grievance Procedures The following policy and procedures regarding non-grade grievances by graduate students can be adopted or adapted in whole or in part by programs/schools/departments
Inoffical translation 1 Doctoral degree regulations (Doctor of Natural Sciences / Dr. rer. nat.) of the University of Bremen Faculty 2 (Biology/Chemistry) 1 Dated 8 July 2015 2 On 28 July 2015, the Rector
All staff members of the Arlington Public Schools have authority to maintain the orderly behavior of students. Students in Arlington Public Schools are expected to demonstrate responsibility and self-discipline
I. Instructor Information: Name: Office Hours: Email: ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE REDEFINED American University of Ras Al Khaimah Syllabus for IBFN 302 Room No: Course Class Timings: II. Course: IBFN 302 Islamic
INSTRUCTIONS 1(10) THE RIGHT TO STUDY Instructions concerning the right to study 1. Purpose of the instructions 2. Application procedures 3. Transfer applications 4. Compulsory annual registration 5. Maximum
LAW ON HIGH SCHOOL C o n t e n t s I BASIC PROVISIONS... 101 The Scope (Article 1)... 101 Aims (Article 2)... 101 Types of High Schools (Article 3)... 101 The Duration of Education (Article 4)... 101 The
Professor David Tidmarsh Vice-Chancellor Perry Barr BIRMINGHAM B42 2SU 21 September 212 Dear Professor Tidmarsh, First Annual Letter I am writing to you in connection with the changes to publication arrangements,
MANAGEMENT CHARTER OF THE FOUNDATION HET RIJNLANDS LYCEUM Article 1. Definitions. 1.1 This management charter uses the following definitions: (a) the Executive Board : the Executive Board of the Foundation,
University of London International Programmes Quality Assurance and Student Lifecycle Sub-Committee Registration Dates The QASL is invited to discuss the recommendations from the working group convened
Lismore Comprehensive School Caring and Learning Together Examinations Policy Policy for External Examinations As a school we in Lismore want our pupils to leave with relevant qualifications in preparation
Academic Policies The purpose of Gwinnett Tech s academic policies is to ensure fairness and consistency in the manner in which academic performance is administered, evaluated and communicated to students.
Mrs Bland s Infant and Nursery School : Procedure Document Name of Policy: Status: Links to other policies: School Complaints Procedure Recommended other School Complaints Policy Content: Committee responsible
Residential Admissions Procedure Manual Effective January 1, 2013 2013 by the Appraisal Institute, an Illinois Not-for-Profit Corporation at 200 W. Madison, Suite 1500, Chicago, Illinois 60606. www.appraisalinstitute.org.
CORE CURRICULUM FOR REIKI Published July 2017 by The Complementary and Natural Healthcare Council (CNHC) copyright CNHC Contents Introduction... page 3 Overall aims of the course... page 3 Learning outcomes
Professor Cliff Allan Vice-Chancellor City North Campus Franchise Street, Perry Barr BIRMINGHAM B42 2SU 24 September 213 Dear Professor Allan, Annual Letter I enclose the OIA Annual Letter for your institution
University of Texas at Dallas DEPARTMENT OF MOLECULAR AND CELL BIOLOGY Graduate Student Reference Guide Developed by the Graduate Education Committee Revised October, 2006 Table of Contents 1. Admission
Meyer 1 Texas A&M University-Kingsville Department of Language and Literature Summer 2017: English 1302: Rhetoric & Composition I, 3 Credit Hours Professor: Dr. Craig A. Meyer Office: Fore Hall 103C Office
Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences School of Health Sciences Subject Outline SHS222 Foundations of Biomechanics - AUTUMN 2013 Section A: Subject Information Subject Code & Name: SHS222 Foundations
MADISON METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT Section 504 Manual for Identifying and Serving Eligible Students: Guidelines, Procedures and Forms TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION. 1 OVERVIEW.. 2 POLICY STATEMENT 3
Page 1 of 19 Recognition of Prior Learning ACADEMIC POLICY Approved by Academic Council on 25 th April 2012 Version number: v5 Last updated: 25 th April 2012 Page 2 of 19 Policy Title Recognition of Prior
University of Toronto OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT AND PROVOST Framework for the Divisional Appeals Processes The purpose of the Framework is to provide guidance and advice for the establishment of appropriate
Somerset Academy of Las Vegas Disciplinary Procedures Somerset Academy of Las Vegas has established the following discipline plan for the progressive discipline of pupils and on-site review of disciplinary
Higher Education Review (Embedded Colleges) of Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd June 2016 Contents About this review... 1 Key findings... 2 QAA's judgements about Kaplan International Colleges UK Ltd...
TENTATIVE syllabus ~ subject to changes and modifications at the start of the semester MKT 4350.001 ADVERTISING Fall 2016 Mon & Wed, 11.30 am 12.45 pm Classroom: JSOM 2.802 Prof. Abhi Biswas Email: email@example.com
Policy Manual Master of Special Education Program Director Dr. Eric Michael Warfield Hall - Room 309 717-262-3109 firstname.lastname@example.org Web Address http://www.wilson.edu/master-special-education Program
General rules and guidelines for the PhD programme at the University of Copenhagen Adopted 3 November 2014 Contents 1. Introduction 2 1.1 General rules 2 1.2 Objective and scope 2 1.3 Organisation of the
P920 Higher Nationals Recognition of Prior Learning 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Peterborough Regional College is committed to ensuring the decision making process and outcomes for admitting students with prior
The Queen s Church of England Primary School Encouraging every child to reach their full potential, nurtured and supported in a Christian community which lives by the values of Love, Compassion and Respect.
Please note: these Regulations are draft - they have been made but are still subject to Parliamentary Approval. They S T A T U T O R Y I N S T R U M E N T S 2007 No. xxxx EDUCATION, ENGLAND The Further