Developed for TEQSA by La Trobe University’s Dr Katherine Seaton, this resource outlines how academics can identify contract cheating in symbol dense fields, and includes an investigations checklist and questions for investigators.

The circumstances

Providers have obligations under TEQSA’s legislative framework to monitor students’ progress within or between units of study. The purpose is to identify students who are at risk of not progressing. This could be an anticipated risk or an observed risk. This enables providers to intervene early, and provide targeted support to these students, if required.

While most providers adequately monitor student performance, we have observed some instances where there is lack of early identification and engagement with students at risk of unsatisfactory progress, and lack of or inadequate support to meet the needs of students.

Many students at risk of not progressing, who do not receive early support, are at higher risk of experiencing disconnection from learning. This has led to some students discontinuing their studies.

It is particularly relevant in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic where face-to-face on campus delivery has been suspended, that providers have robust systems in place to monitor student engagement in their tuition activities, identify students at risk of not progressing, and intervene early to provide appropriate and tailored support.

Our role

Both the HES Framework and National Code 2018 require providers to have systems to monitor student progress and engagement, and promptly support students at risk of not progressing. This includes: 

• HES Framework Standards 1.3.3-1.3.6 which require providers to conduct early assessment of student progress, detect students at risk of poor progress and provide early feedback on student performance, and provide targeted support programs to students at risk of unsatisfactory progress.
• Standard 8 of the National Code 2018 which sets out that providers must safeguard the integrity of Australia’s migration laws by monitoring student progress, identify at risk students and support overseas students to complete their course within the required duration and fulfil their visa requirements for course attendance and course progress. 

Compliance with these standards ensures that students have every opportunity to succeed in their studies.

Our focus

In 2021, TEQSA considered concerns about several providers’ practices for international students, and their ability to detect non-engaging students or students at academic risk of not progressing in their course of study, in order to provide these students with support.

Our review of these matters identified the following issues:

• inadequate policies and procedures for monitoring student progress and engagement in tuition activities
• lack of staff training on how to monitor and identify early a non-engaging student
• failure to follow through on the implementation of intervention strategies for at risk students.

Our review also identified concerns with the application of student admission policies and recognition of prior learning protocols, which may result in providers admitting international students who are not appropriately qualified and applying of credit without an adequate basis. 

In the course of these assessments, we conducted detailed analysis of large volumes of information submitted by the providers and cross-referenced these with enrolment data on the Provider Registration and International Student Management System (PRISMS). 

We paid close attention to providers’ documented policies and procedures to determine whether they met the requirements of the legislative framework, whether these policies and procedures were being applied consistently, and whether they were operating as intended.

Our assessments identified non-compliance with a number of obligations under the ESOS Act and National Code 2018 which have serious implications for international students and the integrity of awards offered. In these cases, we are taking firm regulatory action to protect students and the integrity and reputation of the sector.

What providers can do

We encourage providers to:

• have policies and procedures that support early detection of non-engaging students and students at risk of not progressing, with strategies to support students to meet course requirements throughout their course
• consider best practice when setting institutional policy for detecting unsatisfactory progress, for example applying ‘failure of 50% or more of enrolled units in a study period’, to ensure early detection and intervention
• ensure staff and students understand their responsibilities and are notified of any updates/changes to relevant policies
• monitor and track student engagement throughout a course of study using a variety of means such as assessment submissions, participation in class and frequency of access to the learning management system
• ensure staff are trained in identifying non-engaging students and students at risk of not progressing and are aware of strategies to support students
• have regular check points with students, such as at the beginning or mid semester 
• ensure progress monitoring procedures are regularly reviewed, benchmarked, and improved, to identify which policies are effective in achieving their intent and inform decision-making in relation to what, if anything, needs adjusting
• if things go wrong, ensure a prompt, comprehensive, and documented response
• maintain accurate and comprehensive records about students at risk
• accurately report student non-progression status on PRISMS
• report on student admissions, progression and retention rates to the academic and governing boards regularly throughout the academic year.

Resources

• Guidance note: Monitoring and analysis of student performance
• TEQSA Compliance Report 2021

The compliance report provides details of TEQSA's compliance activities in 2021 and key learnings for providers.

The PDF version of the document is available above. An HTML version will be available shortly.

Case studies

These case studies, contained within the Compliance Report, contain useful information for registered provider's about TEQSA's approach and expectations.

• Case Study: Identifying students at academic risk
• Case Study: Professional accreditation
• Case Study: Wages underpayment

1. Academic integrity in the creative arts: a special case

The creative arts encompasses many fields of study and practice, including:

• performing arts, such as dance, drama, and theatre
• media arts, such as film and screen-based works
• interactive works, such as digital games and experimental art
• music, including composition, recording, and performance
• visual arts, such as painting, photography, design, sculpture, and mixed media
• literature, such as literary fiction and children’s literature.

Work produced during a course of study in the creative arts may differ from assessment in other disciplines in the following ways:

1. It is non-text-based: work may consist of a performance, video recording, digital or interactive work, music composition, audio recording, or physical artefact.
2. It is creative: works demonstrate individual authorship, incorporating original and subjective elements.

While breaches of academic integrity, such as plagiarism and contract-cheating, can occur in the creative arts, defining academic integrity, and detecting breaches of integrity in creative arts works is complex because:

• Creative practice occurs within established artistic traditions and networks of influence. Creative works may adapt, reference, or integrate elements of pre-existing creative works as a legitimate form of creativity.
• The distinction between copying, inspiration, and coincidence in a creative work can be contested, as demonstrated by the frequency of copyright and plagiarism disputes in this area:
  • In 2013, the song ‘Blurred Lines’ was the subject of a copyright dispute. Songwriters Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke were successfully sued for infringement by the estate of Marvin Gaye, who argued that the song intentionally copied Gaye’s song ‘Gotta Give It Up’.
  • Visual artist Damien Hirst has been publicly accused of plagiarism by multiple artists who argue that Hirst’s works show overwhelming similarities of subject matter, technique, and style to their own.
• Creative works are not typically produced under examination conditions: they are usually the result of a lengthy creative process in which the creator engages with various research materials, sources, and often collaborators.
• Common understandings of appropriate uses of non-text content, such as video, audio, and images, can be shaped by external influences such as social media and not aligned with academic, industry, and legal practices.
• Expectations and requirements surrounding the use of existing materials can vary by task, medium, and discipline (e.g. performing, remixing or composing a musical work).
• Creative works can consist of multiple elements (e.g. a film includes a script and a soundtrack).
• Attribution practices for non-text materials (e.g. a music score or performed work) are medium- and discipline-specific, and can be unfamiliar to students.
• While similarity detection tools for non-text works exist (e.g. Shazam for recorded music, Google Image Search, and YouTube Content ID for video), these are not integrated into learning management systems.
• Similarity detection tools rely on matching submitted content to online databases of content. Databases may be incomplete, or tools may be unable to match content due to manipulation of the submitted work.

2. Academic integrity as authentic learning

Integrity, and ethical conduct more broadly, is crucial for creative arts practitioners.

Academic integrity practices of attribution and citation help to develop awareness of ownership and permitted use, which connects to the following ethical, legal, and practical considerations in the creative arts:

• Copyright constitutes a legal framework for ownership and usage. Relevant areas to the creative arts include moral rights; fair dealing; assigning and licensing rights; fees and ownership; and rights specific to particular media, such as artistic works, dramatic works, musical works, cinematograph films, and sound recordings.
  See: Australia Copyright Council, Arts Law Centre of Australia
• Creative Commons provides a standardised set of copyright licenses and tools that allow creators to grant a range of copyright permissions for creative works.
  See: Creative Commons
• Currently, Australia does not offer legal protection for traditional cultural heritage. The Australia Council for the Arts has developed protocols that outline ethical conduct when engaging with Indigenous cultural material, peoples, and communities.
  See: Protocols for using First Nations Cultural and Intellectual Property In The Arts
• The terms of use defined by online media platforms, including video and audio streaming services, social media, and hosting platforms, constitute a further area for consideration in the sharing, distribution, and (re)use of creative works.

3. Embedding academic integrity in the curriculum

Blythman, Orr, and Mullin (2007)¹ recognise that there can be “confusion over rules of acceptability” when it comes to using the work of others in creative practice.

Popular misconceptions over authorship and permitted use, combined with wide availability of online media and numerous types of non-text content, contribute to this confusion.

This can be addressed by embedding discussions of academic integrity, and ethical conduct in the creative arts more broadly, within creative arts curricula. Strategies include:

• Exploring and defining concepts such as authorship, originality, remix, homage, and pastiche.
• Analysing works which creatively adapt, re-use, and build on pre-existing work, e.g. Roy Lichtenstein’s Drowning Girl.
• Discussing public plagiarism and copyright disputes relevant to the discipline, including legal and ethical perspectives, evidence, and outcomes, e.g. George Harrison’s ‘My Sweet Lord’.
• Exploring the purpose of an artist’s statement, exegesis, or reflection in relation to creative works.
• Providing detailed guidance on discipline-specific practices for citation and attribution.
• Clearly indicating resources and materials that may, or may not, be used within an assessment, and reasons why.
• Integrating real-world industry practices into assessments, e.g. compiling a cue sheet to record all songs and compositions used in a film or television production, in line with APRA AMCOS guidelines.
• Discussing ethical and legal concepts in using and attributing non-text materials, including online materials and social media content, e.g. moral rights, procedures for obtaining and recording permission, public domain, fair dealing.
• Reviewing social media platforms’ terms of use, in relation to content ownership and usage rights for both uploaders and other users, e.g. TikTok’s Intellectual Property Policy, YouTube’s Copyright and Fair Use Policies, Instagram’s Intellectual Property FAQ.

4. Institutional academic integrity policy and the creative arts

An increasing number of disciplines outside the creative arts are employing creative and non-text assessments (e.g. podcasts, videos, and interactive media) as digital production tools become more available.

Institutions therefore must develop academic integrity policy that relates to creative arts disciplines as well as creative assessment types. An inclusive policy might:

• Develop a culture of awareness for academic integrity in creative non-text works, e.g. designing institutional resources relating to usage permissions and attribution, for instructors and for students.
• Ensure academic integrity training integrates non-text examples and case studies, including creative assessment types.
• Consider and define academic integrity concepts such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and contract cheating, beyond written contexts.
• Reinforce the relevance of academic integrity to copyright, creative practice, and professional practice beyond educational contexts.

5. Designing assessment for academic integrity

Major creative works produced during a course of study are not assessed against a correct or model response, but use complex criteria that may include creativity and originality, demonstration of discipline-specific techniques, and critical awareness.

Potential strategies for designing creative arts assessment with academic integrity in mind include:

• Scaffolding assessments to include the drafting and ideation process, e.g. written proposal, work-in-progress presentation, and submission/performance of final work.
• Integrating a complementary assessment such as an artist’s statement, exegesis, or reflection incorporating: discussion of the creative process including aims, influences, and research undertaken; statement of authorship; written transcription of creative elements, if relevant (e.g. script, transcript, or score); disclosure and acknowledgement of resources, personnel, materials, and works informing the final creative work.
• Including a viva voce, demonstration, or presentation on the finished creative work, allowing assessors to clarify required details and to determine originality of ideas and techniques.
• Constraining assessment parameters (e.g. limiting technique, topic, or form) to reduce the opportunity to appropriate existing creative works.
• Requiring students to explicitly relate creative practice to their individual circumstances, background, creative aims, and learning goals.

Notes

1. Blythman, Margo, Orr, Susan, and Mullin, Joan. (2007). Reaching a consensus: plagiarism in non-text based media. London College of Communication, University of the Arts London.

The circumstances

In 2021 TEQSA investigated several concerns relating to courses that require professional accreditation. These included instances where providers were delivering courses that were not accredited by the relevant professional accreditation bodies and delivering courses in breach of conditions imposed on the course accreditation.

This is a significant concern for TEQSA as the absence or loss of course professional accreditation may prevent a student from progressing in a course or practising in their chosen profession upon graduation.

Our role

Professional accreditation of courses is specifically referenced in the HES Framework:

• Standard 1.4.2c requires that the learning outcomes of a course of study include knowledge and skills required to be eligible to seek registration to practice where applicable
• Standard 3.1.5 requires that courses are professionally accredited by relevant bodies if such accreditation is required for graduates to be eligible to practise
• Paragraph 6.2.1i requires providers to have credible business continuity plans and adequately resourced financial and tuition safeguards to mitigate disadvantage to students who are unable to progress in a course of study due to unexpected changes such as the loss of professional accreditation
• Standards 7.1.1, 7.1.2 and 7.1.5 require that the representation of a course is accurate and not misleading, for example, not describing a course as accredited for the purpose of professional registration until such accreditation has been obtained.

In addition, section 29(1) of the TEQSA Act requires providers to notify TEQSA of an event that happens or is likely to happen that will significantly affect the provider’s ability to meet the HES Framework. The loss of, or failure to obtain, professional accreditation would trigger this notification requirement, as the provider is no longer compliant with the HES Framework and there is a heightened risk to students and possible reputational damage.

The cases

When TEQSA becomes aware that a course does not have, or loses, professional accreditation, we actively engage with the provider. The level of engagement varies according to the willingness and capability of providers to identify risks to their higher education operations and demonstrate that material risks are managed and mitigated effectively.

• Case 1: The provider informed TEQSA through a material change notification that a course they were offering was provisionally re-accredited with conditions by the professional accreditation body. The provider subsequently informed TEQSA that, after addressing the concerns set out in the conditions, the course had been granted full accreditation. No students were disadvantaged and TEQSA did not take further action.
• Case 2: TEQSA was informed by a professional accrediting body that it had conducted a re-accreditation assessment of a suite of courses and one course had not been re-accredited. The provider had not informed TEQSA of this outcome. TEQSA engaged with the provider and it submitted a material change notification with information about course assurance arrangements for affected students, including transfers to other providers and refund of fees. TEQSA was satisfied the provider had suitable arrangements in place and did not take further action.
• Case 3: TEQSA became aware that a provider was delivering a course that required, but did not have, professional accreditation, with students graduating or about to graduate. TEQSA engaged with the provider intensively, because of our significant concerns about the impact on affected students. The provider voluntarily suspended all new admissions into the course while the application for professional accreditation was resolved. TEQSA asked for detailed arrangements to mitigate any disadvantage for all affected students. In response, the provider submitted a tailored solution for each student, including transfer to another provider, coverage of tuition fees if extra study was required, refund of costs for lost units and financial support where necessary. TEQSA was satisfied suitable arrangements had been put in place and did not take further action. 

What providers can do

Providers should have robust governance processes in place to ensure that courses of study have the required professional accreditation and are not misrepresented. This includes:

• robust course development and review processes to ensure the course design meets the relevant professional body requirements
• periodic external referencing and other benchmarking activities
• the risk register clearly identifies the risk to reputation and the potential disadvantage to students if professional accreditation of a course is not obtained or is lost
• adequately resourced financial and tuition safeguards are in place to mitigate disadvantage to students if professional accreditation is not obtained or is lost 
• all representations of a course in respect to professional accreditation are accurate and not misleading, particularly for those courses that require professional accreditation for graduates to practise. Where professional accreditation is pending, students should be clearly informed of this status and understand the impact if professional accreditation is not successfully obtained
• regular and transparent communication with professional accreditation bodies to keep abreast of any changes to requirements and ensure continued compliance
• if the status of professional accreditation changes, fully inform affected students of the potential impact on their studies and future employment outcomes.

TEQSA Compliance Report 2021

The concern

Throughout 2021, TEQSA continued to work closely with the Fair Work Ombudsman (FWO) on the issue of large-scale underpayment of staff by a number of Australian universities. While the FWO is the lead agency responsible for investigating breaches of the Fair Work Act 2009, this is a key issue for TEQSA. In particular, the historic and widespread underpayment of casual academic staff by many universities goes to the reputation of the sector, and of individual providers, in terms of upholding the quality of teaching, learning and the student experience.

In respect to TEQSA’s remit, these practices put providers at risk of non-compliance with the HES Framework, principally:

• Standard 6.2.1a which requires governing bodies ensure that the entity ‘comply with the requirements of the legislation under which the provider is established, recognised or incorporated, any other legislative requirements’ (for instance, national workplace laws)
• Standard 6.2.1e which requires governing bodies ensure that risks to higher education operations have been identified and material risks are being managed and mitigated effectively
• Standard 3.2.5 which requires that teaching staff are accessible to students seeking individual assistance with their studies, at a level consistent with the learning needs of the student cohort
• Section 5.2 which requires providers take action to mitigate foreseeable risks to academic and research integrity.

TEQSA’s response

Since our first engagement with providers in relation to underpayments in August 2020, we have engaged closely with 15 universities who were either named in the media, self-reported to the FWO, or provided information to TEQSA as part of the material change notification obligation. The purpose of our engagement was to understand the extent of the issue and identify any underlying issues, and what the relevant universities were doing to address the non-compliance and ensure ongoing compliance.

We observed that the response to the underpayment issue has been mixed.

Some universities have been proactive in addressing the issue, including engaging external professionals to undertake a comprehensive review of payroll practices and provide advice on the interpretation and application of relevant enterprise agreements and legislation, as well as implementing contemporaneous record-keeping systems.

On the other hand, a number of universities either do not appear to recognise the seriousness of the issue or are not responding in the way TEQSA would expect of a well governed and well managed quality higher education provider. For example, some providers have undertaken only limited, internal reviews of identified problem areas.

In responding to this issue, TEQSA expects to see that providers:

• have undertaken a comprehensive review of payroll, time and record-keeping practices
• have clear steps in place to mitigate and manage identified risks
• have rectified any instances of underpayments and demonstrated how underlying issues will be addressed
• are embedding ongoing monitoring to ensure continued compliance with workplace laws and reporting to the audit and risk committee
• are cooperating fully with the FWO in its investigations. We also expect providers to notify TEQSA under their material change obligations if they identify material issues through their review process.

TEQSA and the FWO shared these observations with provider peak body representatives in a webinar in September 2021. This was followed by a plenary session with Universities Australia. TEQSA continues to work closely with the FWO in 2022, meeting bi-monthly and sharing information, where the law permits, to ensure a coordinated regulatory response.

• TEQSA Compliance Report 2021