He was escorted from the examination room and the unauthorised material was removed from him. He was disqualified from the qualification penalty 7. Each candidate denied wrongdoing. Sanctions for centre staff malpractice — centres Candidate B, who had already been assessed by the time the theft was committed, was not implicated. GCE A Level Economics and Religious Studies The candidate was involved in a timetable clash and had to be supervised after the morning examination until the start of the afternoon examination, which was Religious Studies.
Sanctions and penalties for centre staff malpractice — individuals Some other candidates who were not part of the sample had been given far higher marks than the coursework justified. The candidate admitted the offence. The candidate had sat the examination previously and had been told on numerous occasions that they could not take their own text books into the examination. Ignorance of the regulations will not, by itself, be considered a mitigating factor. The decision 15 9. A head of centre once advised by the awarding body should not ordinarily communicate further with the candidate.
The invigilator was warned that her details would be coursswork on file for a period of giudelines years and should she repeat such an offence, a sanction would be applied. On investigation it was confirmed that after the completion of the high level controlled assessment, the member of staff made indications in pencil on the work and the work was returned to candidates who were given time to make corrections. It may also be used with linear qualifications.
Statements from the candidates spoken to revealed that she had given advice about particular responses. The candidate admitted failing to acknowledge the copied material and apologised for guidelibes having taken note of briefings on the dangers of plagiarism.
It was agreed that candidates, whose certificates had been withdrawn, could be resubmitted for verification and therefore re-certificated during the next six months. As he was seriously disturbing the other candidates, he was then asked to leave the room by the invigilator but insisted on having his walkman back. The candidate claimed this was due to a misunderstanding of deadline dates.
GCSE Art and Design The centre reported that a candidate disrupted the examination by throwing a pencil at another candidate three desks away. Approval of specific assessment tasks A failure in a specific subject or sector area relating to the nature of the assessment tasks chosen.
This penalty can only be applied to qualifications which are unitised. Candidate A admitted to turning round coursewkrk looking at some of the answers on the script of candidate B.
Regulations and Guidance – JCQ Joint Council for Qualifications
Other instances of malpractice may be identified and considered by the awarding bodies at their discretion. Centres which have had centre recognition withdrawn should not assume that re-approval will be treated as a formality. In all cases the most recent version of the regulations must be referred to.
Units which have been banked in previous exam series are retained. The candidate lost all his marks for the component penalty 3. The centre was asked to investigate the case and the teacher made a statement. The centre was visited. The head of centre should deal with the investigation in a timely manner.
It is not necessary to inform the head of centre of this ghidelines as details of the allegation will be communicated from the awarding body. GCE A Level Media Studies A candidate who had been permitted to complete her Media Studies examination after the scheduled time, because of a timetable clash, broke the supervision arrangements before the examination. The funding agencies will also usually conduct their own investigation if fraud is suspected.
Failure by a centre to investigate allegations of suspected malpractice in accordance with the requirements in this document also constitutes malpractice. Centre staff malpractice 31 Part 2: As a result, Candidate A was disqualified from all qualifications taken in that series penalty 8. The awarding body had lost confidence in the ability of this centre to adhere to its examination regulations.
GCE A Level Economics and Religious Studies The candidate was involved in a timetable clash and had to be supervised after the morning examination until the start of the afternoon examination, which was Religious Studies. There was evidence of an added sentence. The centre reported that the teacher conducting the test was not a member of staff; the centre had used an agency to employ the courzework solely to conduct the Speaking Test.
The candidate was disqualified from the whole qualification penalty 7and doursework from sitting any examinations with the awarding body for one year penalty 9.
Exam Malpractice Guide
Any units banked in a previous series are retained, but the units taken in the present series and the aggregation opportunity are lost. The candidate was disqualified from that subject penalty 7.
The normal penalty for this offence is disqualification jdq all subjects in this series penalty 9. Where a conflict of interest may be seen to arise, investigations into suspected malpractice should not be delegated to the manager of the section, team or department involved in the suspected malpractice.