Procedures for Malpractice

This procedure is intended as guidance for ISTD teachers and their staff, including ISTD Approved Dance Centres, and others involved in arranging ISTD dance examinations.

The ISTD, as an awarding body approved by the regulatory authorities, will act in accordance with the published guidance documentation from them. In accordance with that guidance, the ISTD will undertake an initial evaluation including risk assessment, to establish the scope of the matter. If the ISTD decides to conduct a full and further investigation, it will inform the regulatory authorities on commencement of this and provide the name and address of the centre/teacher, the allegations, and qualifications concerned.

Where other awarding bodies are involved, the regulatory authorities may manage a co-ordinated approach. In these specific circumstances, the ISTD undertakes that it will act under their instruction and work in accordance with the regulatory authorities’ immediate requests and timescales for investigation and conclusion, which may be beyond those given below.

Malpractice is deemed to be those actions and practices which threaten the integrity of the examinations and certification. It should be noted that this includes any ISTD written examination or assessment, as well as performance examinations. The following are examples of malpractice and other instances of malpractice may be considered at the ISTD's discretion.

• Failing to abide by the instructions or advice of an invigilator, supervisor, or the ISTD, in relation to the examination rules and regulations.
• Impersonation - pretending to be someone else, arranging for another to take the place in the examinations.
• Obtaining, receiving, exchanging or passing on information which could be examination related, by means of talking, written papers or notes, during the course of the examination.
• Copying from another candidate (including the use of ICT to do so).
• Plagiarism - the failure to acknowledge sources properly and/or the submission of another person's work as if it were the candidate's own.
• The deliberate falsification of candidate information in order to conform to examination entrance criteria.
• Obtaining unauthorised access to examination material prior to an examination.
• Failing to keep examination papers secure prior to the examination.
• Assisting candidates in the production of written assessments, beyond that permitted.
• The alteration of any results document, including certificates

Allegations of malpractice may be reported to the ISTD by examiners, assessors, tutors, invigilators and candidates. Anonymous reports of malpractice will not be investigated. The ISTD will deal directly with the Head of the school or dance centre, and it is the responsibility of that person to conduct the investigation, and submit a written report to the Customer Services and Quality Assurance Department. In cases where an allegation is made against a member of the ISTD working on their own, the response will be required from the member concerned. The report should include a detailed account of the relevant circumstances and details of any investigations carried out; written statements from all parties concerned; any relevant materials; any mitigating factors.

Candidates and staff accused of malpractice must be given the opportunity to respond in writing to the allegations, which may be included with the report, or may be supplied separately to the ISTD. They must have access to all the evidence against them in order to provide full responses, and should be entitled to have a suitable witness present at an appropriate stage of the investigation.
They must be made aware of their right of appeal to the ISTD should a judgment be made against them by the school.

The reports will be submitted to an ISTD panel, consisting of the Chairperson of the relevant Faculty Board, the Chief Executive, the Head of Customer Services and Quality Assurance, and other members as appropriate to the case. The panel may delegate responsibility for deciding straightforward cases to the Head of Customer Services and Quality Assurance.

The panel will establish that correct procedures have been followed in the investigation, and that the person involved in the alleged offence has been given the opportunity to make a personal statement. The panel will determine if the regulations have been broken; the appropriate measures to protect the integrity of the examination; and the nature of the penalty. In cases where the allegation is upheld, all details will be reported to the disciplinary panel of the ISTD who will determine any appropriate action in relation to the member’s status and inform the ISTD Council.

Where an investigation establishes malpractice by an ISTD member employed within a school or centre, any subsequent disciplinary action is the responsibility of the employer. However, the ISTD will take action to protect the integrity of the examinations and has the right to impose special conditions on the future involvement in its examinations.

The ISTD reserves the right to refuse entry of candidates for examinations and withhold the issue of results while investigations are ongoing, and depending on the outcome, results may be released or permanently withheld.

The following sanctions or penalties may be applied flexibly according to the particular circumstances of each case:

• The candidate and/or ISTD member is issued with a warning.
• The candidate is disqualified from the unit, in the case of the teaching qualifications, or the whole qualification, and/or barred from taking any further examinations.
• The ISTD member or school may no longer have any involvement with the administration or practice of any ISTD examination, and/or be barred from entering further candidates.
• subject to the decision of the disciplinary panel, the member may be expelled from the society

The decision of the ISTD panel(s) will be conveyed to the Head of School within 7 days. An appeal against the decision may be made in writing within a further 7 days, to the Chief Executive. This will be considered by Council, and their decision given within 7 days of that meeting.

If the appellant is dissatisfied with the final decision, a further appeal may be made to the Regulatory Authorities.

The Head of Customer Services and Quality Assurance will report any cases upheld to the regulatory authorities, and details of all cases will be held on file for inspection. Information will be shared with other awarding bodies or other agencies as necessary.

In cases where as a result of an investigation, a previously issued certificate is deemed invalid, that certificate must be returned to the ISTD. The examination result will be declared void, thus ensuring that no duplicate can be issued, and the regulatory authorities will be informed.

Back to Top