If you or your co-examiner suspects that a student has cheated and the student has not yet received a grade for the exam in question, you must first put the exam assessment on hold. Contact studies administration or a person in your department/school secretariat who is responsible for teaching activities – this person can help you with the administrative aspects of suspending exam assessment.
After this, you should thoroughly investigate and document your suspicions before you report the case to Educational Law. Please note that any planned oral defence should be suspended until the case is decided. You can also get help with this from studies administration or the relevant person in your department/school secretariat.
In the case of an oral defence of an exam paper where cheating is suspected, for example in the form of plagiarism or improper use of GAI, the report should be made before the oral defence takes place.
If the suspicion of cheating arises during the oral defence, it should be interrupted if possible. In this connection, the student must be informed that the assessment has been suspended due to suspected cheating.
If you are an exam supervisor and you suspect that a student has cheated in an on-site examination, you must complete a supervisor’s report (tilsynsnote) in which you describe the circumstances. You must also inform the student (in person) that the case will be reported.
Subsequently, you must report the case to Educational Law and inform the local exam administration team. The exam administration team is responsible for putting the assessment of the exam on hold and notifying the relevant parties (e.g. the course coordinator).
Plagiarism is a complex concept, but, in the context of an exam, it means that the student neglects to provide sources and thus presents a text, an illustration or idea, etc., as his/her own work when in fact it is not.
The student must provide sources when using any of the following material:
Plagiarism in any part of the student’s exam paper constitutes exam cheating. It makes no difference to the ruling of the case if the plagiarism occurs in the metadata, the empirical data, the analysis or the conclusion.
However, the following parts of the exam are not subject to plagiarism rules:
More information about missing sources
It counts as exam cheating if the student:
More information about incorrect paraphrasing
To paraphrase is to present another author’s text in a different way. The correct way to paraphrase is when the student processes another person’s thoughts and ideas and formulates them using his/her own words and sentence structure.
If the student just rearranges the sentences a bit and replaces a couple of words with synonyms, this constitutes plagiarism. Even if the source is provided.
More information about students reusing their own material / self-plagiarism
If the student reuses parts of his/her own previously graded exam papers from another course, he/she must provide the source. If not, this constitutes exam cheating.
The student may reuse his/her own text from the ordinary exam in the re-examination in the same course without this being regarded as exam cheating. This only applies to exams in the same course.
More information about notes and templates produced in collaboration
If a student refers to notes directly in his/her exam paper and these notes were produced in a group (for example, in a study group), the student should state that they are group notes. If not, this constitutes exam cheating.
If a student refers to templates that were written in a group before the exam, the student must also state that these templates were produced in collaboration with his/her fellow students.
If you suspect plagiarism, you must ensure that your suspicion is documented in your report by indicating every section in the text where you think the student has plagiarised.
If your claim is based on an Ouriginal report, it is important that you do not regard this report as proof that the student has plagiarised. An Ouriginal report only indicates textual similarity and does not determine, for example, whether the student has referenced his/her sources. You must therefore check whether the student has plagiarised and mark the relevant sections in the text. Conversely, it is possible that Ouriginal cannot detect all instances of plagiarism, for example those that relate to translated or paraphrased text. It is therefore important that, as an assessor, you are always vigilant and adopt a critical approach to the text and the Ouriginal report.
You should also find the sources from which the student has plagiarised and indicate the relevant sections in the source material. If you cannot locate the sources, you can get help from the Royal Danish Library/ AU Library.
Once you have documented your suspicions of plagiarism, you should report the case to Educational Law, who will make an overall assessment of the extent of the plagiarism in order to determine the appropriate disciplinary measures.
Students are often encouraged to collaborate as part of their university courses. However, when it comes to the exam, there are other rules that you must be aware of – if the exam requires that students write an individual exam paper, it is considered exam cheating if the student collaborates on this paper.
Collaboration can take many forms, including students sharing notes or exam papers or discussing a take-home exam assignment so that they all reach the same result.
If you suspect that students have collaborated on an individual exam assignment, you must document this by indicating all the places in the students’ exam papers where you think collaboration has taken place.
If possible, please expand on what makes you think the students have collaborated. For example, you may notice the same atypical mistake in two or more exam papers and believe it unlikely that the students would have made this mistake independently. You may also notice linguistic or grammatical mistakes or distinctive features that appear strikingly identical.
If you need to report more than one student for the same instance of suspected collaboration, you can make a joint report using the same template. However, you must state the names and student registration numbers of all the students involved (Read more under “How to complete a report template”). Each student should be notified individually about the report.
During on-site examinations, it counts as exam cheating if the student:
You must complete a supervisor’s report that adequately describes how the unauthorised contact occurred. In cases of exams with online monitoring, you must attach the ITX Flex report. This can be obtained from the exam administration team.
Aiding and abetting is also regarded as exam cheating. During on-site examinations, it counts as cheating if the student completes his/her exam assignment and subsequently shares the assignment with other students, for example through file-sharing systems or storage apps such as Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive or DropBox.
Cases of aiding and abetting are usually reported in the same way as other types of exam cheating, for example plagiarism or collaboration, and must therefore be documented in the same way as in these cases.
If a student is suspected of aiding and abetting during a supervised on-site examination, documentation can consist of a detailed supervisor’s report or an ITX Flex report (if the student has been monitored online).
It counts as cheating if a student falsifies, fabricates, manipulates and/or plagiarises data as part of his/her assignment.
If you suspect that a student has falsified or fabricated data, you must document your suspicion by marking the relevant places in the student’s exam assignment. Please provide as much detail as possible on why you believe the student has falsified or fabricated data.
It counts as cheating if a student gets another person to complete all or parts of his/her exam assignment.
If you suspect that a student has got another person to complete his/her exam assignment, you will need to document this in different ways depending on the specific situation.
For example, if relevant, you can attach a screenshot of the website on which the student has asked for help or offered to pay for exam assistance. You can also indicate all the relevant sections in the exam assignment and explain why you do not believe the student has completed them him- or herself.
The main rule is that students are allowed to use generative AI (GAI) at exams at Aarhus University unless the academic regulations or the course catalogue explicitly state that using GAI is not allowed.
If you suspect that a student has used GAI to write an exam paper for an exam for which the use of GAI is not allowed, or that a student has used GAI without disclosing it, there are issues you need to clarify and material you need to prepare before reporting the case to Educational Law:
Note that this is not an exhaustive checklist.
In order for the university to sanction a student for unauthorised use of GAI, sufficient documentation must exist. The following documentation must be attached to your report:
In this regard, we would like to stress that the following criteria do not constitute sufficient documentation for the use of GAI when taken in isolation:
It is cheating if the student:
Please note: It is not cheating if the student brings an exam aid that remains in a closed bag for the entire duration of the exam. It is only if the student opens this bag during the exam and, by doing so, has access to the exam aid that this is regarded as cheating.
Mobile phones, smartwatches, tablets, music players and other digital devices and audio devices are regarded as unauthorised exam aids that must not be accessed during the exam.
Please note that the student's equipment must be completely turned off - it is not enough to turn on flight mode or other modes e.g. do not disturb.
The exam supervisor must complete a supervisor’s report in which he/she describes which unauthorised exam aids the student has brought and – if relevant – used. In cases of exams with online monitoring, you must attach the ITX Flex report. This can be obtained from the exam administration team.
It counts as exam cheating if a student provides inaccurate attendance information in courses for which attendance is compulsory and thus for which the student’s attendance is considered part of the exam.
This applies to both the student who was not present and the student who provided incorrect information on his/her fellow student’s behalf.
You must provide documentation that the student did not attend teaching even though he/she is listed as being present in the relevant registration system or on the attendance list. This documentation can be a written note from the teacher accompanied by a printout of the registration system or a copy of the attendance list.
For on-site exams, the student must be present at the required location. It counts as cheating if the student is not present but submits his/her exam assignment from an external IP address.
You must provide documentation of the IP address from which the student submitted his/her exam assignment and the attendance list compiled by the exam supervisor, which shows that the student was not present at the exam location. You must also forward the student’s exam assignment.
It counts as cheating if the student continues to work on his/her exam assignment after the end of the exam. In practice, exam assignments submitted after an exam deadline will automatically be rejected.
If a student has advanced knowledge of an exam assignment and still participates in the exam, this counts as exam cheating – regardless of who is responsible. If AU is deemed responsible, the student will be offered a new examination attempt.
You must provide documentation that the student had prior knowledge of the exam assignment. If a student shared the exam assignment with other students before the exam, this documentation could be a printout from the digital forum on which he/she shared the assignment.