Student protection - PI112502
Public interest case November 2025 | Justified
Applied Business Academy (ABA)
This case summary about ABA College illustrates the impact on individual students where there is a gap in student protection.
AI and academic misconduct - CS072501
Case summary July 2025 | Justified
A student with autism was invited to respond to allegations that they had included large sections of AI-generated content in an essay submission.
AI and academic misconduct - CS072502
Case summary July 2025 | Justified
An international student was invited to attend a viva because Turnitin had identified that their coursework contained substantial amounts of AI-generated content.
AI and academic misconduct - CS072503
Case summary July 2025 | Not Justified
A student was asked to attend a viva exam because there were concerns about their dissertation. During the viva, the student told the examiners that they had used AI to help them write their dissertation.
AI and academic misconduct - CS072504
Case summary July 2025 | Partly Justified
An international student was asked to attend a viva because Turnitin had indicated that their module assignment contained a high percentage of AI-generated content. The provider was not satisfied with the student’s explanations during the viva, and so it convened an academic misconduct panel.
AI and academic misconduct - CS072506
Case summary July 2025 | Not Justified
An MBA student complained about the feedback they received for their dissertation, saying that it was too generic to be useful. They said that an AI detection tool showed that the feedback had been partly AI generated. They asked that their work be reconsidered, and more detailed feedback provided.
AI and academic misconduct - CS072505
Case summary July 2025 | Settled
A postgraduate student was invited to respond to allegations of suspected academic misconduct after Turnitin indicated that an essay contained a high proportion of AI-generated content, including hallucinated references.
Academic Appeal - CS042501
Case summary April 2025 | Partly Justified
A student nurse had several periods of interruption to their studies because of ill-health, non-payment of their tuition fees, and delays in obtaining an up-to-date DBS certificate. When the student returned to their studies, they expected to complete approximately 400 placement hours. At a return-to-study meeting, the provider told the student that they needed to complete a further 1,300 placement hours. The student disagreed with this, and the provider considered their objections using its academic appeals procedure.
Disabled students - CS042504
Case summary April 2025 | Partly Justified
A partially sighted student enrolled on a one-year taught Masters course. Students could access their core texts and additional reading using an online database. In October, the student told the provider that they were having some difficulty using the online database. In January, the student explained that their assistive software could not read the text at all. The provider contacted the database supplier to try to find a solution. The provider also supplied the student with digital copies that were accessible and printed versions of texts when the student asked for them.
Disabled students - CS042506
Case summary April 2025 | Justified
A student had a long-term health condition which caused pain and mobility issues, and which was subject to flare ups. Before enrolling on the course, the student was told that they could access teaching remotely during flare ups. Shortly after the student enrolled on the course, they had a flare up of their ongoing condition. After one month staff raised concerns with the student about their attendance. Staff said that remote attendance was not permitted because of the requirements of a professional regulatory body. The student withdrew from the course before the end of the first term.
We publish summaries of some of the complaints that we review. We always leave out of the summary any information that might identify the student who made the complaint. In some cases we decide that it is in the public interest to publish a summary of a complaint that includes the name of the provider.