Malpractice and maladministration policy

EdgeWorks™ is an approved centre for multiple Awarding Bodies and is committed to ensuring that all aspects of the delivery of qualifications meet the Awarding Bodies standards for professionalism and integrity.

Definition – Malpractice (by centres/providers)

Malpractice is any activity or practice which deliberately contravenes procedures and regulations. It means that there are serious concerns about the integrity of the assessment or the validity of certificates. We take it very seriously. Examples of malpractice:

Deliberate misuse of the Awarding Organisation logos by the centre/provider
Contravention of examination regulations by the centre/provider
Falsification of documents.

Definition – Malpractice (by learners)

Cheating of any nature by learners, including plagiarism
Contravention of examination regulations by the learner
Repeated maladministration (normally three consecutive incidents).

For specific guidance on plagiarism and cheating, please see the EdgeWorks™ Plagiarism policy.

Definition – Maladministration

Maladministration is an activity or practice which results in non-compliance with regulations, but it’s normally the result of a genuine mistake rather than any deliberate plan to gain an unfair advantage.

Examples of maladministration:

Late registration of learners with awarding bodies.
Claiming certification for incorrect units.

Staff and learners should take all reasonable steps to prevent malpractice and/or maladministration from occurring throughout the development, delivery and assessment of the Awarding Organisation’s qualifications and programmes. For more general concerns or complaints, please see the Complaints Policy.

Use of artificial intelligence (AI) in assessment

The misuse of artificial intelligence in assessment, marking or feedback may constitute maladministration or malpractice, depending on the nature and intent of the activity.

Examples of maladministration related to AI include:

Failure to adequately review AI-generated feedback or marking suggestions before issuing outcomes to learners
Inconsistent or inappropriate use of AI tools due to lack of training or oversight
Accidental use of AI systems in ways that do not align with EdgeWorks™ procedures

Examples of malpractice related to AI include:

Deliberately accepting AI-generated assessment decisions without assessor review
Uploading learner work to unauthorised or public AI systems that store, reuse or train on data
Using AI in ways that intentionally undermine the integrity, validity or fairness of assessment outcomes

All suspected AI-related maladministration or malpractice must be reported through Quality Assurance in line with this policy and escalated to the relevant Awarding Organisation where required.

Process

All staff have a responsibility to be aware of the serious nature of malpractice and maladministration. Such situations must be carefully managed to ensure that it does not impact the standards of delivery of any qualification.

Senior Management will communicate the policy to all staff as part of the Induction process and it will be incorporated within the Staff Handbook.

All documented instances of malpractice or maladministration are to be reported via Quality Assurance (QA) to the Senior Management Group (SMG) as part of their regular meetings.

When potential malpractice or maladministration is identified, the individual and Line Manager should document this and the activities that must be avoided to prevent any further malpractice in the delivery of the qualification. The document should be signed by both parties and brought to the attention of the centre manager.

EdgeWorks™ will report all suspected or alleged cases of malpractice or maladministration straight away to the appropriate Awarding Organisation.

In cases where breaches have occurred due to maladministration rather than malpractice, the matter will be referred to Quality Assurance, the Operations Director and the External Verifier to agree on action to prevent any future occurrences.

The outcome will be communicated to the Senior Management Group and other relevant parties no more than 14 days later. The report and any actions arising will be communicated to Quality Assurance and the External Verifier.

Action

The Awarding Organisation Quality Regulatory Group will oversee the investigation process, and they will ratify the outcome.

If the investigation confirms that malpractice by a centre/provider has taken place, depending on the gravity and scope, one or more of the following actions will be taken:

Disallowing all or part of a learner/s assessment evidence or marks.
The learner/s certificates will not be issued, or previously issued invalid certificates for that learner/s will be withdrawn.
No further registrations will be accepted for the learner/s.
Your centre or provider risk rating will be reviewed, which could lead to the suspension of registrations, suspension of certification or suspension of centre approval and/or qualification approval.
A report will be made to the relevant regulatory bodies and may be shared with other awarding organisations and/or other agencies such as funding bodies or the police.
Awarding Organisation membership may be withdrawn for the learner/s.

If a learner wishes to appeal against a decision to take action as recommended in the investigation report, they will be referred to the Appeals Policy.