1. Document Control
Policy Owner: Head of Quality / Academic Director
Responsible Committee: Academic Board (or Academic Governance and Quality Assurance Committee)
Approval Authority: Principal / Director and Academic Board
Effective From: [Insert date]
Review Date: [Insert date, typically 12 months]
Version: 1.0
Applies To: All students and staff involved in learning, teaching and assessment at Equra College London, including programmes delivered under partner arrangements where applicable.
2. Purpose
Equra College London is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity. This policy sets out clear expectations for honest scholarship, appropriate academic practice, and responsible use of digital tools including artificial intelligence. It also explains how the College promotes integrity through education and assessment design, and how suspected breaches are addressed under the Academic Misconduct Procedure.
3. Scope
This policy applies to:
a. All assessed work and academic activity, including coursework, examinations, presentations, portfolios, projects, reflective work, group work and online assessments.
b. All delivery modes including in person, blended and online learning.
c. All students registered with Equra College London.
d. All staff involved in teaching, supervision, marking, assessment setting and academic support.
Where Equra College London delivers provision under a partner arrangement, this policy operates alongside any partner academic integrity requirements. In the event of conflict, the stricter requirement will apply.
4. Definitions
Academic integrity: Honest, responsible and ethical academic practice, including proper acknowledgement of sources and authentic authorship.
Plagiarism: Presenting another person’s work, ideas, words, data or structure as one’s own without proper acknowledgement.
Collusion: Unauthorised collaboration where individual work is required, including sharing content that is then submitted as original.
Contract cheating: Outsourcing work to a third party, paid or unpaid, or submitting work produced by someone else.
Fabrication or falsification: Making up data, evidence, references or results, or altering information dishonestly.
Impersonation: Having someone else complete or sit an assessment, or attempting to represent another person’s work as your own.
AI tools: Software that generates, edits, summarises or rewrites text, images, code or other outputs (including chatbots and generative AI).
5. Policy Statement and Principles
Equra College London expects all students to produce work that is their own and to acknowledge sources accurately. The College promotes academic integrity through:
a. Clear guidance, induction and skills development.
b. Transparent assessment briefs and marking criteria.
c. Assessment design that supports authentic learning and reduces misconduct risk.
d. Fair, consistent and timely handling of suspected breaches.
Academic integrity is an educational priority. The College will support students to develop academic skills, while also applying formal procedures where conduct falls below required standards.
6. Expected Academic Practice
Students must:
a. Submit only work that they have authored, except where group work is authorised.
b. Reference all sources appropriately using the required referencing style for the programme.
c. Use quotation marks and citations for direct quotations.
d. Acknowledge paraphrased ideas with citations even where the wording is original.
e. Keep notes and drafts in a way that allows authorship to be demonstrated if required.
f. Follow assessment instructions, including permitted tools and permitted collaboration.
Staff must:
a. Provide clear guidance on academic practice and referencing expectations.
b. Set assessments with clear boundaries on permitted support and permitted tools.
c. Mark fairly and consistently in line with criteria.
d. Apply this policy consistently and direct suspected cases through the Academic Misconduct Procedure.
7. Plagiarism and Unacceptable Academic Practice
The following are examples of unacceptable practice, depending on context and assessment instructions:
a. Copying text, ideas, models, data or structure without citation.
b. Patchwriting or heavy paraphrasing that closely follows the source, without appropriate citation.
c. Reusing one’s own previous assessed work without permission (self plagiarism) where not permitted.
d. Submitting work that is largely produced by another person or a paid service.
e. Using translated text from sources without acknowledging the original source.
f. Submitting invented references or citations that cannot be verified.
8. Collaboration, Group Work and Permitted Support
8.1 Collaboration rules
Students may discuss ideas and learning, but must not share text or completed answers in a way that undermines individual assessment, unless the assessment explicitly permits collaboration.
8.2 Group work
Where group work is set, the assessment brief must specify:
a. The expected contributions of each student.
b. How marks are allocated to group and individual elements.
c. How individual contribution is evidenced.
8.3 Third party support
Proofreading that corrects spelling and grammar may be permitted if it does not rewrite content or change meaning. Any proofreading support must comply with programme requirements. Paid writing services or “coaching” that results in rewritten content is prohibited.
9. Use of AI and Digital Tools
Equra College London recognises that digital tools may support learning and productivity. However, students must maintain authentic authorship, academic integrity and transparency.
9.1 General principle
Unless explicitly permitted in the assessment brief, students must not submit AI generated content as if it is their own original work.
9.2 Permitted use, where allowed by the assessment brief or module guidance
Permitted uses may include:
a. Brainstorming topic ideas or outline structures.
b. Explaining concepts for learning purposes.
c. Generating revision questions or practice quizzes.
d. Improving readability of student authored text, where the student remains the true author and the work remains within academic standards.
e. Language support for students who require help with academic English, where the student retains ownership of ideas and content.
9.3 Prohibited use, unless specifically authorised
The following are prohibited unless the assessment brief explicitly allows them:
a. Generating whole answers, paragraphs, reports or essays for submission.
b. Rewriting or paraphrasing source material to evade plagiarism detection or to misrepresent authorship.
c. Generating reflective accounts of experiences the student did not genuinely have.
d. Creating or fabricating references, citations, quotations, data or evidence.
e. Using AI to impersonate another person or produce work for another student.
f. Using AI outputs without verifying accuracy, where this results in misleading claims or false references.
9.4 Disclosure and transparency requirement
Where AI use is permitted, the student must disclose use clearly and honestly. The College may require a short AI use statement within the submission, for example:
a. The tool used.
b. The purpose of use.
c. What the student changed or verified.
d. Confirmation that the final work is the student’s own.
Where a module or partner requires a specific disclosure format, students must follow those instructions.
9.5 Accuracy and accountability
Students remain responsible for the accuracy of all content submitted, including any content influenced by digital tools. AI tools can generate incorrect or fabricated information, including false citations. Submission of false or unverified information may constitute academic misconduct.
10. Evidence of Authorship
To protect students and support fair decision making, Equra College London may request evidence of authorship where concerns arise. This may include:
a. Draft versions and version history.
b. Planning notes or research notes.
c. Annotated bibliographies or reading logs.
d. Evidence of data collection, calculations or working sheets.
e. Short academic discussion or clarification meeting where appropriate and proportionate.
Any meeting undertaken for clarification must be fair, documented and conducted in accordance with the Academic Misconduct Procedure and applicable partner processes.
11. Detection Tools and Academic Judgement
Equra College London may use text matching or AI detection tools as part of academic practice. Such tools provide indicators only. Decisions are not made on automated scores alone. All concerns must be considered by appropriately trained staff using academic judgement, evidence, and procedural fairness.
12. Education and Prevention
The College supports academic integrity through:
a. Student induction and academic skills orientation.
b. Referencing workshops and writing support.
c. Clear assessment briefs with guidance on permitted tools and collaboration rules.
d. Formative practice tasks and feedback that support improvement.
e. Consistent messaging across modules and programmes.
13. Handling Suspected Breaches
13.1 Procedure
All suspected breaches of academic integrity, including suspected misuse of AI, plagiarism, collusion or contract cheating, must be handled under the College’s Academic Misconduct Procedure. This policy does not replace the procedure.
13.2 Fairness and proportionality
The College will ensure concerns are handled fairly and proportionately, considering:
a. The nature and extent of the concern.
b. The level of study and assessment type.
c. Evidence of intent, understanding and prior training.
d. Whether this is a first instance or repeated conduct.
e. Any relevant mitigating circumstances considered through the appropriate process.
13.3 Support for students
Students will be signposted to academic skills support to reduce recurrence and strengthen learning.
14. Related Policies and Documents
This policy should be read alongside:
a. Academic Misconduct Procedure
b. Assessment Regulations for Taught Programmes
c. Assessment and Feedback Policy
d. Learning, Teaching and Assessment Framework Policy
e. Student Code of Conduct
f. Mitigating Circumstances and Extensions Procedure
g. Academic Appeals Policy and Procedure and Consolidated Student Appeals Procedure
h. Student Complaints Procedure
i. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Policy
j. Data Protection Policy and relevant privacy notices
15. Monitoring and Review
The College monitors implementation of this policy through:
a. Academic misconduct trends and outcomes.
b. Assessment performance and moderation reports.
c. Student feedback on academic skills and clarity of assessment expectations.
d. Partner feedback and quality reviews where applicable.
This policy is reviewed annually or sooner if partner requirements, sector expectations or regulatory changes require updates.