Malpractice and Maladministration

Learning Resource Network (LRN) defines malpractice as an attempt to gain an advantage over other candidates by the use of unfair and unacceptable methods. Common to all cases of malpractice is the attempt to affect by deceitful means an assessment of academic ability, standing or progress.

LRN wishes to ensure that its centres, candidates and those involved in the management and administration of its qualifications are made aware of their responsibilities through this written policy.

Malpractice can arise for a number of reasons, including:

• any action undertaken which is intentional and that provides candidates with an unfair advantage;
• any action which arises due to ignorance or carelessness in the application of the regulatory criteria.

LRN expects each of its candidates and centres to fully comply with this policy.  In the case of any investigation by us or the regulatory authorities, candidates and centres must also comply with the requirements of the investigating team.

In the case of suspected malpractice, centre staff must immediately secure the examinations material from being removed from the centre.  They must also ensure that disruption to candidates continuing to sit their examinations is kept to an absolute minimum.  In all cases of suspected malpractice, the Centre Manager will become the authorised contact between the centre and LRN.

LRN will work openly with the qualifications regulators in any follow up investigation.  Furthermore, LRN confirms its willingness to make available, upon request, all required information to the regulatory authorities.

Malpractice by centre staff could be in the form of:

• Breaches of security relating to the confidentiality of examination material. g. – permitting unauthorised material to be brought into the examination room, failing to keep the examination room secure before and during the examination process, failing to keep examination scripts secure before and after the examination process in order to ensure secure despatch to examiners or amending examination materials without authorisation;
• Providing improper assistance to candidates E.g. – assisting or prompting students with answers during the examination, providing candidates with excessive amounts of support or providing candidates with evidence to present as their own;
• Other forms of malpractice. g. – failing to ensure the examination centre conforms to the requirements laid down by LRN causing or allowing work to be assessed which is not the students own work.

Examples of Senior Invigilator (or other centre representative) malpractice could be in the form of:

• Breaches of security relating to the confidentiality of examination material. E.g. Failing to keep examination scripts in a secure location prior to the examination taking place;
• Failing to keep completed examination scripts in a secure location during the correction process; transmitting examination papers or examination results via e-mail in breach of policy;
• Providing improper assistance to a student, either by allowing them to become aware of the content (or part thereof) of an examination prior to the examination taking place, or by deliberately marking a student’s script more favourably than the norm for the examination (or contrary to the approved marking scheme);
• Deliberately hindering a student, by marking their script harshly compared to the norm (or contrary to the approved marking scheme), or by losing (or causing to be lost through negligence) a student’s script (or part thereof).

Examples of candidate malpractice could be in the form of:

• Defacement or misuse of examination material;
• Bringing unauthorised equipment into the examination room (e.g. – mobile phones);
• Failure to follow an invigilator’s instruction during the examination;
• Bringing unauthorised and unacceptable evidence into the examination room;
• Copying, or attempting to copy, the work of another student;
• Colluding, or attempting to collude, with others during an examination in an attempt to gain an unfair advantage;
• Behaviour which has the potential to disrupt the smooth running of the examination;
• Plagiarism of another’s work;
• Impersonation – allows others to present themselves as the student;
• Altering or forging any results documents or certificates;
• Offensive or insulting behaviour towards centre staff.

Where there are suspected or actual cases of candidate malpractice, all instances must be reported in writing using the malpractice report form (MRF1).   This must be e-mailed to LRN using the following e-mail address: enquiries@LRNglobal.org

Upon receipt of the MRF1, LRN will undertake an investigation into the alleged malpractice.

Should the Senior Invigilator feel a candidate’s presence within the examination centre will cause disruption to other candidates, they would have the authority to expel the candidate(s) from the examination centre.

This action must be clearly stated on the report form (MRF1) and include the name of witnesses to the suspected malpractice.  In the case of expelling a candidate from the examination centre, their script must be secured and returned to LRN along with the report form.  Should LRN feel any of its rules of conduct for the examination have been broken, it may declare the examination void.

Should LRN discover an assessment centre has failed to comply with its duty to report suspected malpractice in a timely manner or should it feel the assessment centre has failed to cooperate to the fullest extent, LRN may restrict that assessment centre from acting as a future centre.

Where there are suspected or actual cases of assessment centre or Senior Invigilator/Invigilator malpractice, all instances must be reported in writing using the malpractice report form (MRF1).

This must be e-mailed to LRN using the following e-mail address: enquiries@LRNglobal.org.  Upon receipt of the MRF1, LRN will undertake an investigation into the alleged malpractice.

Should LRN discover an assessment centre, Senior Invigilator/Invigilator has failed to comply with their duty to report suspected malpractice in a timely manner or should it feel that they have failed to cooperate to the fullest extent, LRN may restrict the assessment centre from acting as a future centre or in the case of Senior Invigilator/Invigilator, it will implement the disciplinary procedure outlined in the Rules & Regulations.

In all cases of malpractice, LRN will investigate the alleged malpractice, which will include interviewing assessment centre staff, the students affected and any witnesses to the alleged malpractice. LRN will seek to conclude its investigation within 30 calendar days.  In cases of invalid certification, LRN will report these instances to Ofqual and will follow the advice and guidance issued as to the remedial action it should take

This procedure is designed to ensure that all decisions are consistent, fair and based on the fullest information available.  We intend to complete the investigation of malpractice cases within 30 calendar days.

Our policy on malpractice will be monitored and formally reviewed as part our policy on self assessment and continuous improvement.  The results of which will be reported and formally signed off by the Responsible Officer of the Awarding Organisation.