Case Summaries

The student denied using AI and said it was likely that they had recorded the references incorrectly due to the high number of sources they had used. They provided evidence of the correct sources they had accessed, as well as earlier versions of their essay, showing how they had developed their work.

The provider upheld the allegation, and the student received an overall failure grade for the module with any resit marks being capped. It placed significant weight on the inclusion of fake references as a strong indication of AI.

The student appealed on the basis that the penalty was disproportionate. The provider rejected the appeal.

The student complained to us.

We invited the provider to consider whether it wanted to put forward an offer to settle the complaint. We were concerned that it had not shown how it had engaged with the student’s evidence or explanations for the referencing errors, including reasons why this evidence was not considered persuasive. Without a more detailed reasoning for the decision, it was difficult to conclude that its decision was reasonable.

The provider acknowledged that its final decision lacked detail. After further consultation with the student, the provider made an offer to reconsider the matter afresh. The student accepted the provider’s offers and the complaint to us was Settled.