Malpractice and Maladministration Policy

Purpose and scope

Learners, employers and awarding bodies need to trust that every result and certificate we issue reflects genuine achievement. This policy explains what we treat as malpractice and maladministration, how we prevent it, how concerns are reported and investigated, and what can follow.

It applies to learners, trainers, assessors, markers, administrators, associates and anyone else involved in the delivery, assessment or certification of our programmes, whether live virtual, onsite, blended or self-paced. It covers assessments we set and mark ourselves. It also applies to preparation for external professional exams, where the exam body's own rules always come first.

We are an independent training provider. Our own completion and achievement certificates are issued by Xcademia. Where a programme leads to an external exam or qualification, the exam body or awarding body sets its own malpractice rules, and we follow them.

What we mean by malpractice and maladministration

Malpractice is any deliberate action, neglect or failure to act that threatens the integrity of an assessment, a result or a certificate. Maladministration is a failure to follow assessment or certification requirements through error, oversight or weak process, whether or not it was deliberate. We deal with both seriously, but we respond differently to an honest mistake than to deliberate dishonesty.

These lists are examples, not a complete set. If you are not sure whether something falls within this policy, ask us before acting.

Preventing malpractice and maladministration

Prevention is better than investigation. We work to make the rules clear and to make it easy to do the right thing.

• We explain the assessment rules at induction or before the first assessment, including what counts as acceptable help, how sources must be acknowledged, and what is and is not allowed when using AI tools. Where a programme has specific rules, we say so in the assessment brief.
• Learners are asked to confirm that the work they submit is their own through an authenticity declaration, where the assessment calls for one.
• For online assessments, we apply secure practice appropriate to the assessment, such as controlled access, clear instructions on permitted resources and, where it is justified, checks on identity.
• Assessment materials, marking guidance and results are held under document control, with access limited to those who need them.
• Trainers and assessors are briefed on this policy and on their own responsibilities. They declare any conflict of interest before assessing or marking.
• Where more than one assessor is involved, sample review and calibration help us spot inconsistent marking and records before results are confirmed. See our Assessment and Certification Policy.
• We check that records and certificates match the defined requirements for the programme before they are issued.

Reporting a concern

Anyone can report a concern, including learners, employers, colleagues, associates and members of the public. Please report a concern as soon as you can, because early reports are easier to look into fairly.

• Email info@xcademia.com and put "Confidential" at the start of the subject line. Your email will be directed to the Quality lead.
• Give as much detail as you can: what happened, who was involved, when and where it happened, and any evidence you have. Please do not investigate it yourself or confront the person involved.
• If your concern involves the Quality lead, say so in your email and we will arrange for it to be handled by someone else in management.
• You may report anonymously. We will consider anonymous reports, although it can be harder to investigate fully if we cannot ask follow-up questions.
• If you are a member of staff or an associate and you are worried about the consequences of speaking up, read our Whistleblowing Policy.

We treat reports in confidence and share details only with those who need to know in order to deal with the matter. We do not penalise anyone who raises a concern honestly and in good faith, even if it turns out to be mistaken. Deliberately making a false report is itself a conduct matter.

How we investigate

When we receive a concern, the Quality lead decides whether it falls within this policy and, if so, what immediate steps are needed to protect the integrity of any assessment or result. This can include pausing a result or certificate while we look into the matter. Pausing is a neutral step and is not a finding.

• Impartiality. The investigation is led by someone who was not involved in the assessment or the events concerned and who has no conflict of interest.
• Right to respond. The person concerned is told what is alleged and given a fair opportunity to respond and to put forward their own evidence before any decision is made.
• Evidence. We gather what is relevant, such as the submitted work, assessment and marking records, attendance and system records, and written accounts. We assess it on the facts.
• Timeliness. We keep the matter moving without cutting corners, and we keep the people involved informed of progress.
• Confidentiality. Information is shared only on a need-to-know basis and is handled in line with our privacy policy and data protection law.
• Records. We keep a written record of the concern, the investigation, the decision and the reasons for it, with the supporting evidence.

Where the matter involves an external exam or an awarding body's qualification, we also follow the reporting and investigation requirements of that body. We do not decide on its behalf.

Outcomes and sanctions

Outcomes are fair, proportionate and consistent. We take account of how serious the matter is, whether it was deliberate, whether it was a first occurrence and the effect on other learners and on the value of the result or certificate. Where the cause was a gap in our own process, we treat it as maladministration and correct it.

We tell the person concerned the outcome and the reasons in writing, and explain how to appeal.

Appeals

A learner or member of staff who disagrees with a finding or outcome under this policy can appeal. Appeals are handled under our Complaints and Appeals Procedure, and are considered by someone who was not involved in the original decision.

For an external exam or awarding body decision, the appeal route is the one set by that body. We will tell you where to find it.

Awarding bodies, review and learning

Where a confirmed or suspected case affects an awarding body's qualification, we will notify that body in line with its requirements, and follow its instructions on investigation and outcomes. We have applications in progress with NCFE, ILM, ECE and ITIL, and none has yet been approved. Nothing in this policy should be read as approval or accreditation by any of them. These notification arrangements will apply once, and for as long as, an approval is in place. Until then, they do not apply to our own certificates, and our own certificates are not awarded by an external body.

We use every case, including those that are not upheld, to improve. The Quality lead records the cause, the corrective action, the owner and the review date, and checks later whether the action has worked, in line with our approach to corrective action. We look across cases for patterns, such as recurring problems with an assessment, and feed what we learn into assessment design, learner guidance and trainer briefings.

The Quality lead owns this policy and reviews it at least once a year, or sooner if there is a material change, such as a new awarding body requirement or a change in our assessment arrangements.

Questions about this policy?

Contact us or email info@xcademia.com.