• Section 1 - Summary
• Section 2 - Scope
• Section 3 - Policy/Regulation
• Section 4 - Procedures
• Part A - Summary of Roles and Responsibilities
• Part B - Overview
• Part C - Educative Approaches
• Part D - Assessment Design and Prevention
• Part E - Poor Scholarship
• Part F - Types of Academic Integrity Breaches
• Part G - Detection of Academic Integrity Breaches
• Plagiarism, Washing and Academic File Sharing
• Contract Cheating
• Collusion
• Secure Assessment/Exam/Test Cheating
• Part H - Responding to Academic Integrity Breaches
• Educative Responses
• Restorative Responses 
• Sanctions
• Part I - Decision-Making Matrix 
• Academic Integrity Breach Response Chart
• Part J - Recording, Monitoring and Reporting on Academic Integrity Breaches 
• Part K - Continuous Improvement 
• Section 5 - HESF/ASQA/ESOS Alignment
• Section 6 - Definitions

Section 1 - Summary

(1) This Procedure outlines how Victoria University (VU) prevents, detects and responds to breaches of academic integrity. It supports:

1. students to understand and apply good academic practices;
2. staff to consistently manage academic integrity concerns; and,
3. fair, proportionate and educative responses to academic integrity breaches.

Section 2 - Scope

(2) This Procedure applies to:

1. All teaching staff who are involved in assessing the work of coursework students at VU in whatever mode (face to face, blended or online) or location; 
2. All supervisory staff who are involved in supervising the research components of courses; 
3. All students enrolled in a VU course; and,
4. all assessment activities conducted by or on behalf of VU.

(3) This Procedure should be read in conjunction with the:

1. Student Misconduct Regulations 2019 and the Student Misconduct Procedure;
2. Academic Integrity Policy;
3. Assessment for Learning Policy;
4. Student Conduct Policy;
5. AI Governance and Responsible Use Policy;
6. Material available on VU’s Student AI Hub;
7. Material available on VU’s Academic Misconduct site;
8. Material available on Academic Integrity Register (AIR) System Site (staff only).

Section 3 - Policy/Regulation

(4) Academic Integrity Policy

Section 4 - Procedures

Part A - Summary of Roles and Responsibilities

Part B - Overview

(5) Maintaining academic integrity is a shared responsibility that involves all students and all VU and third-party staff. The integrity of the learning process must be maintained by all members of the University and its partners.

(6) For all students, academic misconduct can have long-term consequences and graduates may be required to disclose academic misconduct incidents to accrediting or professional bodies such as the Victorian Legal Admissions Board (VLAB).

Part C - Educative Approaches

(7) VU supports an educative approach to academic integrity that supports students to develop academic skills and understand scholarly expectations.

(8) Academic integrity education may include:

1. academic integrity modules;
2. referencing and citation support;
3. discipline-specific guidance;
4. assessment scaffolding; 
5. feedback designed to improve scholarly practice; and
6. introducing students to the requirements and expectations arising under the Academic Integrity Policy.

(9) Teaching staff should:

1. clearly explain academic integrity expectations;
2. provide guidance regarding citation and acknowledgement practices;
3. explain the appropriate use of artificial intelligence tools;
4. communicate expectations regarding file-sharing and collaboration; and,
5. design assessments that minimise opportunities for academic misconduct.

(10) Students are introduced to the norms and expectations around academic integrity at the commencement of their studies. This includes discipline specific norms around referencing and the acknowledgement of the work of others. Key learning about academic integrity, as well as purpose-built training modules, are integrated into:

1. the academic apprenticeship period as part of VU's First Year College program; 
2. pathway transition points; and,
3. postgraduate coursework programs.

Part D - Assessment Design and Prevention

(11) Assessment at VU is designed to be, as far as possible, conducive to fostering academic integrity principles. 

(12) Assessment design complies with the requirements of the Assessment for Learning Policy. 

Part E - Poor Scholarship

(13) At times, assessed work may show evidence of incomplete, improper or inaccurate citation. This may occur where a student:

1. makes a genuine attempt to reference their work, but has inadequate referencing skills; or
2. displays a lack of awareness that content should be cited (e.g. using verbatim content from course note materials, or their own notes of a teaching staff’s/educator’s material that use phrases without acknowledgement).

(14) In these cases, teaching staff should provide feedback and take an educative approach to support the student to improve their academic practice. This may include referral to learning support and library resources and guidance on correct citation skills.

(15) An educative response under this clause does not constitute a finding of academic misconduct and must not involve the imposition of a misconduct sanction.

(16) Where there is evidence that the conduct may involve more than poor scholarship, including potential plagiarism or deliberate misrepresentation, the matter must be assessed in accordance with Part G of this Procedure.

Part F - Types of Academic Integrity Breaches

Part G - Detection of Academic Integrity Breaches

(17) VU has expectations for all staff in promoting academic integrity. These expectations extend to the detection of potential breaches of the Academic Integrity Policy.

(18) Assessors marking student assessment tasks have a responsibility to look for anomalies or unusual content in student work, which may indicate that some form of academic integrity breach has taken place. When something of concern is identified it does not mean that the case is proven – just that it requires further action.

(19) VU provides a suite of AI tools that are University-licensed, supported, and assessed for alignment with VU policies and standards. This suite does not include AI detection tools. VU does not accept evidence from AI detection tools in regard to Academic Integrity breaches relating to inappropriate use of Gen AI.

(20) VU affirms wider sector experience that assessors are skilled in the identification of potential breaches.

(21) The following can provide additional tools for evidence of Academic Integrity breaches where anomalies or unusual content is observed.

Plagiarism, Washing and Academic File Sharing

1. The use of pattern recognition software like Turnitin for written assessment or research materials; 
2. Expert identification of copied themes or ideas in visual arts, practical artifacts, performance pieces and other relevant activities; 
3. Creator or other expert identification of copied research data, formulae, software code or other non-textual material; 
4. Examiner or peer reviewer verification of copied material from theses, published work or research findings. 
5. Identification of the assessment response as identical or substantially equivalent to a response provided by other students, either in this unit or another unit. 

Contract Cheating

1. The use of pattern recognition software like Turnitin.
2. Expert analysis by the academic of the student's work as a whole, taking into account student contribution to class. 
3. Analysis of the language and content for responsiveness to the topic, use of words, phrases, structures or norms not consistent with the Australian vernacular or that used in the course of study and vagaries in relation to the topic.  
4. The presentation of several or many substantially similar assessment pieces within one unit may also indicate that assessments have been purchased. 
5. Comparative of analysis of style, language, terminology or spelling variation presented in previous work by the student.

Collusion

1. The use of pattern recognition software such as Turnitin for written assessment or research materials; 
2. The expert identification by assessor of substantially overlapping or identical assessment responses from two or more students in a unit.
3. Examiner or peer reviewer noting of substantially overlapping or identical material in theses, works submitted for publication or research findings. 

Secure Assessment/Exam/Test Cheating

1. The academic staff member setting the secure assessment conditions has responsibility for administering and monitoring that secure assessment conditions are met, and reporting any potential breaches. 
2. Where invigilators are used, the invigilator is responsible for administering and monitoring that secure assessment conditions are met and reporting any potential breaches.
3. Where third parties are employed in an online testing or exam environment where security is a contractual obligation and externally benchmarked, the third party provides evidence of potential breaches with an evidence base to support that required by VU to uphold the Academic Integrity Policy.

Part H - Responding to Academic Integrity Breaches

(22) Responses to breaches of academic integrity will be proportionate, consistent and informed by the nature, extent and intent of the conduct, the student’s circumstances, relevant evidence and any previous substantiated findings. Where a matter constitutes alleged student misconduct, it will be managed in accordance with the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019 and Student Misconduct Procedure.

(23) Where a concern related to an alleged breach of academic integrity exists, the authorised officer will meet with the student to discuss the issue and gather more information and evidence. No allegation is made at this meeting. The purpose of this discussion is preliminary fact-finding and to determine whether an educative response may be appropriate or whether the matter requires referral to a Senior Officer. It does not constitute a formal misconduct investigation under the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019.

(24) There are two potential responses to academic integrity breaches:

1. an educative response (non-punitive) or,
2. the imposition of a sanction (punitive).

(25) The type of response is dependent upon the breach. Breaches that reflect poor scholarship and are unintentional and minor in nature will be met with an educative response, Sanctions will be imposed for breaches that are intentional.

(26) Poor scholarship and minor, unintentional concerns may be addressed through an educative response. Where misconduct is suspected, and an educative response is not appropriate, the matter must be referred for consideration under the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019. Sanctions may only be imposed following an acknowledgement or finding of misconduct and by an authorised decision maker.

Educative Responses

(27)  An educative response is by its nature non-punitive. An educative response to plagiarism must not include a deduction of marks beyond the usual marks assigned for referencing skills. Assigning a grade of zero for an assessment item or a unit for a breach of academic integrity is a sanction rather than educative response, and can only be issued via the processes specified in the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019 and Student Misconduct Procedure. 

(28) In determining if an educative response is appropriate, an authorised officer should consider: 

1. Other work submitted within the unit by the student; 
2. The student's stage within their course (i.e. first-year students may have less understanding of academic integrity and citation requirements than later-year students); 
3. The nature and level of the breach (i.e. reproducing an entire chapter of a text would be more serious than reproducing a paragraph); 
4. Whether the student has been involved in an academic integrity breach previously (staff should consult the Academic Integrity Register to ascertain this). 

(29) Educative responses may include:

1. Providing verbal or written feedback to the student;
2. Providing the opportunity to redo and resubmit the assessment (if this opportunity is given, the maximum mark that may be achieved on resubmission is 50% Pass);
3. Deducting marks allocated for referencing, with explanation of the reasons;
4. Referring the student to one of the academic assistance programs available within the University;
5. Providing the student with examples of plagiarised and non-plagiarised texts to assist them in understanding the difference;

(30) An authorised officer's choice to address these matters in an educative manner does not result in a finding of Academic Misconduct and should not be recorded as an instance of misconduct on the student's record. However, it will still be recorded on the University's Academic Integrity Register. 

(31) Where the authorised officer has reasonable grounds to suspect that academic misconduct may have occurred and an educative approach would be inappropriate or insufficient the breach will be escalated to a Senior Officer for preliminary consideration in accordance with the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019 and Student Misconduct Procedure.

Restorative Responses 

(32)  Restorative responses may be applied where a breach has been substantiated and the student demonstrates accountability and a willingness to learn.  

(33) Restorative responses involve the application of proportionate sanctions combined with actions to address harm and support the student to re-engage with academic integrity expectations.

(34) Restorative responses are generally appropriate for first time misconduct where there is genuine engagement with the process.

(35) Educative responses address poor scholarship, whilst restorative responses apply where misconduct has occurred, but the student demonstrates an intention to repair the breach.  

Sanctions

(36)  A sanction is appropriate for serious breaches of academic integrity such as intentional plagiarism, contract cheating, repeated and intentional file sharing, washing, bribery, falsification of information, breaching secure assessment conditions, exam and test cheating. 

(37) Contract cheating is generally treated as serious misconduct and a punitive response is appropriate.

(38) Sanctions must be applied in accordance with the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019 and Student Misconduct Procedure, having regard to principles of natural justice. 

(39) Available sanctions include but are not limited to:

1. Zero marks for the assessment task; 
2. Zero marks for the unit; 
3. Suspension from the course; 
4. Exclusion from the course.

(40) Serious plagiarism involves copied or appropriated work formed with the clear intention to deceive an assessor, premeditated cheating or other forms of misrepresentation. The effect of serious plagiarism is to compromise the assessment process. 

(41) Serious academic integrity breaches will be investigated as academic misconduct in accordance with the Student Misconduct Procedure or the misconduct processes established under the relevant industrial instrument for staff. 

(42) A Senior Officer may refer serious matters to the Student Misconduct Panel by lodging a Student Misconduct referral form via the Integrity Office. 

(43) Where contract cheating is suspected or substantiated, the matter must be referred for formal misconduct investigation. VU, via the Student Complaints and Integrity Office, may report information about contract cheating providers to TEQSA in accordance with legislative requirements.

Part I - Decision-Making Matrix 

(44) The matrix below provides guidance on the appropriate response to different types of academic integrity breaches.

(45) Academic staff should apply professional judgement when determining the appropriate response, taking into account the nature, extent and intent of the conduct, and the student’s circumstances.

(46) Decision-makers for each type of breach must be exercised in accordance with the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019.

(47) A current list of Senior Officers for the purposes of the Student Misconduct Regulations 2019 is available from the Student Complaints and Integrity Office.

Academic Integrity Breach Response Chart

(48)  The Academic Integrity Breach Response Chart provides guidance to assist staff in identifying appropriate responses or referral pathways. It does not determine whether academic misconduct has occurred, prescribe sanctions or confer decision-making authority.

Part J - Recording, Monitoring and Reporting on Academic Integrity Breaches 

(49) VU will maintain an Academic Integrity Register, recording the details of  breaches, responses, and actions taken. Guidance on recording requirements is provided in the Academic Integrity User Guide.

(50) All staff who detect a breach of academic integrity must: 

1. Check the University’s Academic Integrity Register to determine whether the student has a previous record of breaches; and 
2. Complete the VU – Academic Integrity Suspected Breach Form. 

(51) The Student Complaints and Integrity Office will provide an annual report to the Academic Board on academic integrity incidents, process improvements and emerging issues.

(52) Where contract cheating is substantiated and details of a cheating provider are identified, VU may provide this information to TEQSA in accordance with legislative obligations.

(53) Where a bribery or suspected corruption is identified, the matter may be referred for investigation under the University’s Fraud and Corruption Control - Disclosure and Whistleblower Procedure.  

Part K - Continuous Improvement 

(54) Where a unit or course is identified as experiencing an unusual number of academic integrity breaches, the Course Chair will: 

1. Review the content, type, mode and nature of assessment tasks to ensure that assessment is being designed to minimise opportunities for misconduct; 
2. Review the learning design of the unit or course to support student success in assessment; and 
3. Implement appropriate improvement actions, which may include, but is not limited to: 
   1. Requiring students to undertake academic scholarship training as part of their first unit of study in a course; 
   2. Addressing cohort-specific expectations; and/or 
   3. Providing additional exemplars to help students to grasp correct scholarship practice, including examples of appropriate and inappropriate practice. 

Section 5 - HESF/ASQA/ESOS Alignment

(55)  HESF: Standards 5.2 Academic and Research Integrity (specifically 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4); 6.2.1(j) Corporate Monitoring and Accountability, 7.2.2(d) Information for Prospective and Current Students, 7.3.3 Information Management.

(56) Outcome Standards for NVR Registered Training Organisations 2025: 1.3-1.5 Assessment; 2.1-2.2 Information; 2.3 Training Support; 3.2-3.3 Trainer and Assessor Competencies.

Section 6 - Definitions

(57) Secure assessment: Refer to Assessment for Learning Policy.