Investigation into possible plagiarism

[Peter90]

It's been flagged up to me recently that a number of students have received letters outlining that the institute is investigating possible plagiarism in their April Exam submission.

The timing of this is very disappointing with a week to go to exam results.

has anyone heard of students receiving similar letters and what are their thoughts on the situation?

 

[Han Wang]

It's been flagged up to me recently that a number of students have received letters outlining that the institute is investigating possible plagiarism in their April Exam submission.

The timing of this is very disappointing with a week to go to exam results.

has anyone heard of students receiving similar letters and what are their thoughts on the situation?

yea, I have heard several friends received that letter, and asked to provide evidence before end of this month, and investigation outcome will be released around mid-Aug.

 

[Sarah_64]

Yes, I have received one and I am extremely disappointed with the Institute.

Less than 1 week to go until results day is just not acceptable. If an automatic plagarism tool has flagged this up then why couldn't they have run the tool first thing after the exams and notified students earlier?

They have taken 2.5 months to tell me I am being investigated, but have given me a deadline to get back to them with information in less than 2 weeks?! This again is not acceptable. I have no idea what information I can provide to prove that I didn't do what they accusing me of, I feel like I need a lawyer or something!

Also, not allowing me to book onto the September exams is absolutely shocking. It is treating me as if I am guilty before the investigation has even taken place. Surely it should be innocent until proven guilty?! They say the investigation is likely to be finalised mid-August, but this will be far too late notice to allow enough time to study for the Sep exams, the results day itself is already too late as it is! Why don't they allow students to book Sep exams but refund them if they are proved "guilty"?

The sentences in my exam they have highlighted where the possible plagiarism and collusion has occurred are pure bookwork definitions. I would have written these out word for word if the exam was in a centre as usual. I didn't realise we had to tactfully reword definitions. A definition is a fact, no matter who you ask the answer is the same, so no wonder it flagged that lots of students had the exact same answer!

The fact that they end the letter basically saying it's unlikely they'll answer any of our queries on this is also completely unacceptable. I tried phoning and emailing them on Friday with no response. Especially given that the key question everyone will have is: will we receive our exam result on Thursday? They haven't even specified this!

This is my last exam, I was due to potentially qualify on Thursday, something I have worked so hard for for the last 5 years and the Institute have now taken this celebration away from me.

The April exam sitting should not have gone ahead, end of. They sent out assessment regulation wording that was open to interpretation, refused to clarify anything and have then put the onus on the students if they misunderstood it. They were completely unprepared for marking this new online exam format. Their handling of this whole situation is appalling in my opinion.

 

[Han Wang]

Yes, I have received one and I am extremely disappointed with the Institute.

Less than 1 week to go until results day is just not acceptable. If an automatic plagarism tool has flagged this up then why couldn't they have run the tool first thing after the exams and notified students earlier?

They have taken 2.5 months to tell me I am being investigated, but have given me a deadline to get back to them with information in less than 2 weeks?! This again is not acceptable. I have no idea what information I can provide to prove that I didn't do what they accusing me of, I feel like I need a lawyer or something!

Also, not allowing me to book onto the September exams is absolutely shocking. It is treating me as if I am guilty before the investigation has even taken place. Surely it should be innocent until proven guilty?! They say the investigation is likely to be finalised mid-August, but this will be far too late notice to allow enough time to study for the Sep exams, the results day itself is already too late as it is! Why don't they allow students to book Sep exams but refund them if they are proved "guilty"?

The sentences in my exam they have highlighted where the possible plagiarism and collusion has occurred are pure bookwork definitions. I would have written these out word for word if the exam was in a centre as usual. I didn't realise we had to tactfully reword definitions. A definition is a fact, no matter who you ask the answer is the same, so no wonder it flagged that lots of students had the exact same answer!

The fact that they end the letter basically saying it's unlikely they'll answer any of our queries on this is also completely unacceptable. I tried phoning and emailing them on Friday with no response. Especially given that the key question everyone will have is: will we receive our exam result on Thursday? They haven't even specified this!

This is my last exam, I was due to potentially qualify on Thursday, something I have worked so hard for for the last 5 years and the Institute have now taken this celebration away from me.

The April exam sitting should not have gone ahead, end of. They sent out assessment regulation wording that was open to interpretation, refused to clarify anything and have then put the onus on the students if they misunderstood it. They were completely unprepared for marking this new online exam format. Their handling of this whole situation is appalling in my opinion.

Sorry to hear your experience. I heard from a friend that institution just usually (or always?) sends out this investigation letter one week before result release. Not sure why cannot do that earlier.

 

[ProudActuary]

It's a very difficult one and you have my sincere sympathies. Firstly, how much of your script has been highlighted? Is it every single core reading type question or just a few?

Is your punctuation etc identical to the core reading or is it clearly different? I'd look to understand exactly what has been highlighted, have the IFoA highlighted to you if it links to core reading or whatever?

 

[mwild4803]

I have received one as well. I have NEVER plagiarized.

I had taken many exams with IFoA in the past - all in good standing. I had worked really hard for this exam amidst the whole pandemic situation, and it is despairing to have your entire efforts undermined, much less just a week before results are due.

We are given the chance to refute the claim, but I am at a loss as to how. I have no idea how to prove a negative (i.e. I didn't plagiarize), and neither did I prepare any sort of 'evidence' which IFoA is looking for. How could I have known? I wasn't given any details on how my answer is similar to the core reading either, which makes the claim all the more baffling to me.

The investigation is not finalized, so I can only hope that IFoA knows what they are doing.

For my fellow exam-takers out there, I STRONGLY urge you to prepare 'evidence' against this sort of contingency. You do not want to caught in my position. It is a truly terrible feeling. I myself will certainly be doing a full screen record of my exam session in the future - similar to measures that many other educational institutes have in place now.

 

[almost_there]

Their handling of this whole situation is appalling in my opinion.

I am not surprised. It is a terrible organisation that has a terrible track record of how it deals with its own members. Findings made against them by Courts and regulators with no apologies made. I suggest you flag the matter up with your MPs, complain to Financial Reporting Council as you won't be the only one. They don't deserve their regulatory powers anymore.

We are given the chance to refute the claim, but I am at a loss as to how. I have no idea how to prove a negative (i.e. I didn't plagiarize), and neither did I prepare any sort of 'evidence' which IFoA is looking for.

Just do what they do when they get taken to Court. They deny and fail to produce documentation. Seems good enough for them in a Court so why should they demand more from anyone else. You can't prove a negative and it is unreasonable for them to expect you to.

 

[Sarah_64]

I have received one as well. I have NEVER plagiarized.

I had taken many exams with IFoA in the past - all in good standing. I had worked really hard for this exam amidst the whole pandemic situation, and it is despairing to have your entire efforts undermined, much less just a week before results are due.

We are given the chance to refute the claim, but I am at a loss as to how. I have no idea how to prove a negative (i.e. I didn't plagiarize), and neither did I prepare any sort of 'evidence' which IFoA is looking for. How could I have known? I wasn't given any details on how my answer is similar to the core reading either, which makes the claim all the more baffling to me.

The investigation is not finalized, so I can only hope that IFoA knows what they are doing.

For my fellow exam-takers out there, I STRONGLY urge you to prepare 'evidence' against this sort of contingency. You do not want to caught in my position. It is a truly terrible feeling. I myself will certainly be doing a full screen record of my exam session in the future - similar to measures that many other educational institutes have in place now.

Same! I have never plagiarized and I wouldn't have worked all these years to start doing so at the last exam! They accuse me of possible collusion but I don't even know anyone else that sat the same exam as me, how do I prove that?! Show them my Facebook friends list? It's stupid. Like you say, it's impossible to prove a negative! They should be proving that I did do it, not me proving that I didn't.

Did they tell you which answers were similar to other students? Were they bookwork definitions?

Same as you they reference the core reading as being a source I used. Are they wanting us to go through the whole 30 chapters or so and compare to the exam sentence by sentence?! We were allowed to use personal notes so I really don't understand what the issue is, I made lots of notes and this is all I used. I thought the rules were similar to CP2/CP3. If they didn't want bookwork answers then they should have removed the bookwork questions!

I hope they know what they're doing too but I fear that won't be the case. It seems we are being used to set a precedent to scare candidates sitting online exams in the future.

 

[Sarah_64]

It's a very difficult one and you have my sincere sympathies. Firstly, how much of your script has been highlighted? Is it every single core reading type question or just a few?

Is your punctuation etc identical to the core reading or is it clearly different? I'd look to understand exactly what has been highlighted, have the IFoA highlighted to you if it links to core reading or whatever?

It was 1 sentence in questions 1(i) and 2 sentences in question 3 (i). The first question I used a definition of a partial buy-in. Question 3 asked us to define terminal funding and pay-as-you-go funding. They have said I used core reading, Acted material and the Sep 2018 examiners report. From what I've found, it looks like definitions match the glossary definitions in the notes. Punctuation is not exactly the same and there are a few words that are different.

 

[Trainee_Act]

It's been flagged up to me recently that a number of students have received letters outlining that the institute is investigating possible plagiarism in their April Exam submission.

The timing of this is very disappointing with a week to go to exam results.

has anyone heard of students receiving similar letters and what are their thoughts on the situation?

Hi,

Unfortunately I am also in this situation. In my case it is small parts of the Core Reading and past paper questions.

Yes I used Core Reading and past paper examples when I was studying and I had these written out as reference in part of my "Personal course notes" which the IFOA state "are permitted" in their exam regulations.

I would ask the question on why the IFOA are only dealing with this issue now in July, this decision would have been made months ago to ‘investigate’ many students. It has also not been made clear whether or not we will be receiving an exam result this week.

Everything I used was made applicable to the question and in no place was this a 'copy and paste' exercise.
It is an extremely difficult place that the IFOA have put many students in, questioning their integrity. Especially students like myself who have been working tirelessly through these exams for years and are waiting for qualification.

Since it has come to light that many students, even on this thread are affected by this, it would ask the question - have the IFOA stood up a team of people to look at every single situation in isolation and in detail? If we are to make our case, will each one be given the time and consideration it needs to properly assess the evidence? Or as Sarah_64 said, is this an exercise to set precedent in future and make an example out of students this time?

 

[mavvj]

Do any Acted tutors have any insight into this?

I feel that over the years we have been encouraged to learn bookwork definitions word for word. Often in difficult questions, these definitions can provide a way into questions. The above comments imply that a different approach to the exam is needed.

 

[ProudActuary]

It seems a very strange situation - is it all for the same subject or different subjects here?

 

[almost_there]

It seems a very strange situation - is it all for the same subject or different subjects here?

It's entirely predictable and was predicted by people on this discussion forum.

 

[Admin]

Do any Acted tutors have any insight into this?

Sorry, no additional insight from us but we hope that all who followed the regulations will be able to provide explanations that will be viewed favourably.
Wishing you all the best.
A

 

[Student05]

I got a letter for colluding in the exam. The assessment regulation define it as “collaborating or communicating with another person to gain advantage by any means, including facilitating or receiving such assistance”. They have not shared any information with me other than my script is under investigation. I did not communicate with anyone during the exam, how am I supposed to prove this? Should I provide them my call history for exam duration to prove my innocence? When I asked them for more information about which part of my script was pointing to collusion and what sort of information can I provide to help in the investigation they replied that they can’t share any information with me till the investigation is over. But I can provide any information I feel is relevant. I am at a loss at what to do next when I don’t even know what exactly am I being accused of and how to prove I’m not guilty. If they will only provide me information after the investigation is over then are they even giving me a fair chance to defend myself? Shouldn’t they be providing evidence of why they think I colluded in the exam? I have a very good track record in all my past exams and am appalled at being accused of this!

Has anyone else received a letter for collusion? Any advice on what I can do to defend myself in this situation?

 

[Priya12]

I got this too. My last sitting potentially, I used my notes. In tutorials acted tutors themselves tell us to memorise the notes. I’m certainly mentioning that in my response. so much overlap between mark schemes and core reading. They accused me of copying from the mark schemes for a repeat question then what are mark schemes for? If my exam had a similar qn in an open book exam then why can’t I use my notes, paraphrasing is also considered plagiarising so there’s not difference if they haven’t told us we can’t. Also they didn’t state in the assessment regs that plagiarising software is used we didn’t consent to this. Mark schemes refer to bookwork. This is appalling. Unbeluand I’m so disappointed. We are being accused of plagiarising from the material teaching us. Bloody hell

 

[RStokes]

It seems to me that according to all of this students have been colluding and or plagiarizing for years! We aren't authors producing 100% new content. Most answers, specially in associate level exams, are application of knowledge from core reading and acted notes. So it is to be expected that some of the wording will be the same. I am certain that even without opening the books I would write definitions almost word by word from the notes. Most universities have a percentage of allowed plagiarism since they do acknowledge that is impossible to be 100% original.
Students who aren't confidence writers could also be extremely disadvantage as they may feel now they need to go around the subject and be creative in an attempt to avoid saying similar things to core reading.
I also fail to understand how one avoids this while giving definitions for example in CS2, I completely agree that we have been told by acted to memorize certain things, so what should we do? Avoid the key words and then not get the marks? Or still give the full correct definition and then be told we are plagiarizing?
Or, are we allowed to quote where we are taking it from? If the issue is the implication that sentence is ours, would this be solved by putting quote marks and stating "ACTED" or "Core reading"?

 

[ProudActuary]

It's entirely predictable and was predicted by people on this discussion forum.

Please try to offer assistance/constructive advice or comments to posters, let's keep the thread on track. Feel free to start another thread and we can debate - this isn't the place to not offer constructive comments.

 

[leechang]

I’m in this situation. But I did plagiarise. I’m guilty-the judge needs to throw the book at me-the orange formulae book - wait that might be a bad idea...might plagiarise from it to build a defence. I used the core reading for definitions word for word.
And my notes had some mark scheme answers that were relevant so I used them. I felt like I was doing the examiner a favour by being concise. I used acted notes to develop some of my answers.

Who’d have thought the material that was supposed to help me became my worst enemy- I’ve been to tutorials with acted for over 9 years and they have consistently, I mean consistently said to memorise list, definitions, even paragraphs from the core reading word for word to get all the marks. Acted develop mock exams, if a question from a mock has come up in the past, you jump for joy as u can answer based off a examiners report you have seen. Gone are those days my friends, gone are those days. This is the day and age where we will shiver when answering bookwork questions, shiver me timbers. 2 mark definition? Might skip that and answer an application one instead.

Wait I may be banned from the IFoA.
IFoA: “open book exams are really advantageous as research shows that bookwork questions are limited etc” this is an open book exam, you can use your notes...but only if they aren’t good. If they are good, they would be from mark schemes that’s not allowed. You can’t use mark scheme answers because that would get you marks. We don’t want that.

Apparently my answer is from a 2005 exam. And from “acted notes”. But the acted notes where I think I’ve taken from is from the core reading, and the core reading is from the 2014 exam report, which is repeated in a 2016 exam report which is also in an SOA paper.

“what is the definition of an LMX spiral in general insurance”? Heyyyyyy...Don’t be using the core reading glossary now.

I feel bad for people that were close to qualifying Or it was their final sitting. What could have been a joyous celebration of years of hard work and dedication ruined by the IFoA. This business seems like they are working against us and not with us. Me I’m halfway, so gonna try and move to underwriting. Read in the assessment regulations, that it’s a matter of proportionality, well let me suggest to the IFoA to mark Chinese university papers...plagiarising experts we are.

well my allegation has taught me that I’ve been plagiarism in an exam hall all my life due to the nature of the way I study. Using mark schemes and bpp notes. The end has come. I’m quitting exams and leaving the profession.

was great while it lasted

 

[almost_there]

When I asked them for more information about which part of my script was pointing to collusion and what sort of information can I provide to help in the investigation they replied that they can’t share any information with me till the investigation is over. But I can provide any information I feel is relevant. ?

Their disciplinary scheme right at the beginning says they are meant to operate according to principles of human rights and natural justice. Natural justice includes knowing the case to be met. It appears you are not being informed of the case being met. There should be full disclosure from them what their case is and is based on. If not then IFoA aren't abiding by their own documented processes and this wouldn't be the first time. Don't put up with it.

 

[almost_there]

It was 1 sentence in questions 1(i) and 2 sentences in question 3 (i). The first question I used a definition of a partial buy-in. Question 3 asked us to define terminal funding and pay-as-you-go funding. They have said I used core reading, Acted material and the Sep 2018 examiners report. From what I've found, it looks like definitions match the glossary definitions in the notes. Punctuation is not exactly the same and there are a few words that are different.

Seriously this is so ludicrous. It's about time actuaries took a step back and asked what on earth is the purpose of these exams? It's become even more irrelevant when suddenly even if you write a correct definition you can be accused of cheating. What skill exactly is being tested in rewarding people who have altered the wording of definitions to avoid detection by their stupid software... I foresee new litigation against IFoA for all this.