Investigation Report 201002095

Overview
The complainant (Mr C) complained about the manner in which the University of Stirling (the University) investigated an allegation of plagiarism in relation to his son (Mr A)’s dissertation. The University's Appeal Panel found there were errors in the way the allegation had been raised with Mr A and had offered him the opportunity to attend a further meeting about it. However, Mr C thereafter complained about the manner in which the University had subsequently added an addendum to the minutes of the Exam Board relating to Mr A's dissertation which stated that it had failed on academic grounds in any event. Mr C also complained about the manner in which the University handled Mr A's subsequent complaint about the addendum.

Specific complaints and conclusions
The complaints which have been investigated are that:

1. the University unreasonably and unfairly conducted an inquiry into Mr A's alleged plagiarism as part of a viva examination (upheld);
2. having accepted that the alleged plagiarism was not investigated reasonably and fairly, the University then unreasonably added an addendum to the minute of the Exam Board meeting to imply academic failing without explanation or evidence (upheld);
3. the University unreasonably failed to inform Mr A about the addendum until he requested a meeting to discuss the alleged plagiarism (upheld);
4. the University unreasonably failed to investigate a formal complaint against the addendum to Mr A's satisfaction and refused to allow his complaint to proceed to a Complaints Panel (upheld); and
5. the University unreasonably failed to grant the outcome sought by Mr A when his appeal was upheld (not upheld).

Redress and recommendations
The Ombudsman recommends that the University:

1. make provisions for an independent re-assessment of the dissertation;
2. if required following the re-assessment of the dissertation, re-consider referral of Mr A's complaint to a Complaints Panel;
3. provide evidence to the Ombudsman of the steps taken by the University to implement improvements, as referred to in the Acting Academic Registrar's letter of 9 December 2011;
4. review their Academic Complaints Policy to consider a timescale for response, clarity in relation to sections 11.3.9 and 11.3.10, to ensure there is a procedure in place to follow up on complaints allocated for investigation, and to ensure that responses address the substantive issues raised in complaints; and
5. issue a full apology to Mr A for the failings identified within this report.

The University have accepted the recommendations and will act on them accordingly.