Monash University Calendar - STATUTES

Policy changes

Statute 4.1 - Discipline

Former policy

• definition of research misconduct
• Preliminary review panel which is now convened by the relevant faculty not by the Research Graduate School Committee.

Revised policy

Statute 4.1 - Discipline

Part 1 - General

1. Interpretations

1.1 In this statute unless the contrary intention appears -
'academic misconduct' means cheating or assisting to cheat, whether in an examination or non-examination context;
'assisting to cheat' means assisting a student with an examination or other written or practical work with the intention that the student will thereby obtain an unfair advantage;
'cheating' means seeking to obtain an unfair advantage in an examination or in other written or practical work required to be submitted or completed by a student for assessment;
'chief examiner' means the chief examiner for the subject concerned or, where a chief examiner has not been appointed, the member of the teaching staff in charge of the subject;
'director' means the director or manager of the central secretariat of the university;
'examination cheating' means cheating at or in respect of a university examination;
'faculty', in relation to a student, means the faculty or other entity in or through which the student is pursuing a course of study or, in the case of a student undertaking a double degree, the administering faculty;
'faculty manager' means the senior administrative officer of a faculty;
'general misconduct' means any behaviour which is contrary to a policy of the university or to generally accepted standards of behaviour and includes the conduct specified in subsection 3.2;
'misconduct' means academic or general misconduct;
'non-examination cheating' means cheating that is not examination cheating;
'student' means a person who is enrolled as a candidate for an award of the university and includes a person -
(a) who is between enrolments; or
(b) whose work for the award has been examined or assessed but on whom the award has not been conferred;

Part V - Research misconduct

18. Interpretations

In this Part, unless the contrary intention appears -
'academic staff' means teaching or research staff of the university;
‘research misconduct’ means conduct in or connection with research that:

(a) is dishonest, reckless or negligent; and

19. Report of research misconduct

Where a person in the employment of the university has reasonable grounds to believe that a student may have committed an act of research misconduct, that person must send a written report on the matter to the dean of the relevant faculty and the chair of the Research Graduate School Committee.

20. Preliminary review panel

20.1 After receipt of a report under section 19, the dean of the relevant faculty must constitute a preliminary review panel comprising –

– provided that to be eligible for membership a person must have had no direct involvement in the research of the student concerned.

20.2 For the purposes of subparagraph 20.1.2, where a faculty is divided into departments or schools or there is a centre acting in conjunction with the faculty, the faculty representative must be from and nominated by the relevant department, school or centre.
20.3 After a preliminary review panel has been constituted, the chair of the panel must send the student concerned a copy of the report under section 19 and by notice in writing advise the student-
20.3.1 that the matter is to be referred to a preliminary review panel for investigation; and
20.3.2of the membership of the panel and of any subsequent change in that membership.

21. Powers and duties of preliminary review panel

21.1 A preliminary review panel must make such inquiries as it thinks necessary to determine whether or not there is a prima facie case of research misconduct, and for this purpose -
21.1.1 may require persons to attend and give evidence;
21.1.2 must give the student the right to be heard personally or through a representative, not being a legally qualified person, or by way of a written submission; and
21.1.3 may require the production of documents and other materials.
21.2 A preliminary review panel, after deciding a matter, must send both the chair of the Research Graduate School Committee and the student a report of its decision and, where it has determined that a prima facie case has been established, the reasons for the decision.

22. Research graduate discipline committee

22.1 Where a preliminary review panel determines that a prima facie case of research misconduct has been established the chair of the Research Graduate School Committee , must constitute a research graduate discipline committee to hear and determine the matter.
22.2 A research graduate discipline committee must include -
22.2.1 the chair of the Research Graduate School Committee, or nominee, who shall be chair of the committee;

22.2.2 two members of the academic staff with research supervision experience; and
22.2.3 a representative of the Monash Postgraduate Association nominated by the association.
22.3 After a discipline committee has been constituted under subsection 22.1, the chair of the committee must advise the student concerned –

22.3.1 that the matter is to be determined by the committee;

22.3.2 of the membership of the panel and the student’s veto rights under subsection 22.4; and

22.3.3 that the student is entitled to be heard personally or through a representative who may be legally qualified, or by way of a written submission.

22.4 A student has the right to veto up to two members of a research graduate discipline committee and this right must be exercised in writing to the chair within 14 days after receipt of the membership advice.

22.5 The final membership of the research graduate discipline committee is as ratified by the Research Graduate School Committee.

22.6 At any hearing before a research graduate discipline committee, the university may be represented by a nominee of the Research Graduate School Committee who may be legally qualified.

23. Penalties

23.1 Where a research graduate discipline committee determines that a student is guilty of research misconduct, the committee must impose one or more of the following penalties -
23.1.1 a reprimand;
23.1.2 a fine not exceeding $500;
23.1.3 disallowance of the work concerned by prohibiting assessment or, where the work has been assessed, by annulling the results in the assessed work;
23.1.4 suspension from the university for a specified period;
23.1.5 exclusion from the university.
23.2 Where under paragraph 23.1.3 a discipline committee disallows a student's work, the committee must either -
23.2.1 permit the student to submit, within a specified period, a substitute piece of work for assessment; or
23.2.2 deem the disallowance to be a failure on the part of the student in the examination or work.
23.3 A person who under this section is -
23.3.1 excluded from the university, ceases to be a student of the university; or
23.3.2 suspended from the university, remains a student but is precluded from pursuing candidature in the university during the period of suspension.

24. Decision final