Overview
This unit is designed for students who want to develop knowledge and skills in the automation of the practice of law. This unit incorporates theory, research and the practical application of legal project management, process improvement and innovation frameworks, expert systems, document and process automation, data analytics, machine learning and blockchain. Students will examine software systems that empower consumers including lawyerless internet-based systems that vend interactive documents and intelligent legal assistance. Intelligent systems designed for lawyers to produce inexpensive transactional outcomes will be considered. The challenges, threats, opportunities and ethical considerations associated with these developments will be explored. Consideration will also be given as to how governments, pro bono and community legal centres may directly benefit from automation. Through engagement with legal knowledge engineering, students will develop a legal App. No programming experience or other technical knowledge is required.
Details
Pre-requisites or Co-requisites
Co-requisites: LAWS11057 and LAWS11059, or LAWS11030
Important note: Students enrolled in a subsequent unit who failed their pre-requisite unit, should drop the subsequent unit before the census date or within 10 working days of Fail grade notification. Students who do not drop the unit in this timeframe cannot later drop the unit without academic and financial liability. See details in the Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework).
Offerings For Term 1 - 2024
Attendance Requirements
All on-campus students are expected to attend scheduled classes – in some units, these classes are identified as a mandatory (pass/fail) component and attendance is compulsory. International students, on a student visa, must maintain a full time study load and meet both attendance and academic progress requirements in each study period (satisfactory attendance for International students is defined as maintaining at least an 80% attendance record).
Recommended Student Time Commitment
Each 6-credit Undergraduate unit at CQUniversity requires an overall time commitment of an average of 12.5 hours of study per week, making a total of 150 hours for the unit.
Class Timetable
Assessment Overview
Assessment Grading
This is a graded unit: your overall grade will be calculated from the marks or grades for each assessment task, based on the relative weightings shown in the table above. You must obtain an overall mark for the unit of at least 50%, or an overall grade of ‘pass’ in order to pass the unit. If any ‘pass/fail’ tasks are shown in the table above they must also be completed successfully (‘pass’ grade). You must also meet any minimum mark requirements specified for a particular assessment task, as detailed in the ‘assessment task’ section (note that in some instances, the minimum mark for a task may be greater than 50%). Consult the University’s Grades and Results Policy for more details of interim results and final grades.
All University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
You may wish to view these policies:
- Grades and Results Policy
- Assessment Policy and Procedure (Higher Education Coursework)
- Review of Grade Procedure
- Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – Domestic Students
- Monitoring Academic Progress (MAP) Policy and Procedure – International Students
- Student Refund and Credit Balance Policy and Procedure
- Student Feedback – Compliments and Complaints Policy and Procedure
- Information and Communications Technology Acceptable Use Policy and Procedure
This list is not an exhaustive list of all University policies. The full list of University policies are available on the CQUniversity Policy site.
Feedback, Recommendations and Responses
Every unit is reviewed for enhancement each year. At the most recent review, the following staff and student feedback items were identified and recommendations were made.
Feedback from Student feedback.
The unit should be a mandatory component of the law degree.
A benchmarking process will be undertaken to see how many Australian Law degrees include legal automation as a core requirement.
- Apply process improvement and innovation frameworks to the delivery of legal work
- Identify aspects of legal work and new forms of service delivery that can be automated
- Classify what ethical and regulatory issues are presented by lawyering using intelligent machines
- Construct a software application using teamwork that can model legal knowledge and reasoning to perform useful legal work for non lawyers as a form of social innovation.
This is not an accredited unit.
Alignment of Assessment Tasks to Learning Outcomes
| Assessment Tasks | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Practical Assessment - 80% | ||||
| 2 - Group Work - 20% | ||||
Alignment of Graduate Attributes to Learning Outcomes
| Graduate Attributes | Learning Outcomes | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| 1 - Communication | ||||
| 2 - Problem Solving | ||||
| 3 - Critical Thinking | ||||
| 4 - Information Literacy | ||||
| 5 - Team Work | ||||
| 6 - Information Technology Competence | ||||
| 7 - Cross Cultural Competence | ||||
| 8 - Ethical practice | ||||
| 9 - Social Innovation | ||||
| 10 - Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Cultures | ||||
Textbooks
There are no required textbooks.
IT Resources
- CQUniversity Student Email
- Internet
- Unit Website (Moodle)
- Josef (provided by CQU)
All submissions for this unit must use the referencing style: Australian Guide to Legal Citation, 4th ed
For further information, see the Assessment Tasks.
c.schiavone@cqu.edu.au
Module/Topic
Introduction to Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
AI and the Law: Identify a Simple Legal Issue to Solve using AI
Events and Submissions/Topic
Chatbot Topic Idea - Practical Assessment Part 1 to be submitted by Moodle.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Project Mapping and Creating Solutions using AI in Law: Allocation to a Legal Issue
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Basic Design Principles: Understand and Solve the Problem
Chapter
Josef Legal Modules 1.0 – 3.0 (Available via Moodle)
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Overcoming Design Challenges and Ensuring Usability through Test and Validate
Chapter
Josef Legal Modules 3.0 – 5.6 (Available via Moodle)
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
Module/Topic
Techno-Optimists and Techno-Pessimists: The Ethical Issues from the use of AI in the Law
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
AI use in Legal Private Practice, Government Agencies and Community Legal Centres
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Chatbot Sprint 1/5: Legal Automation in Practice by Josef Legal and Group Assignment
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial Questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Chatbot Sprint 2/5: Effective Project Management and Narrowing the Question
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Chatbot Sprint 3/5: Principles of Bot Design and Answering the Question
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Chatbot Sprint 4/5: Avoiding Pitfalls and Overcoming Challenges
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are required to complete the prerequisite Moodle activities prior to the Tutorial.
Tutorial questions to be completed.
Module/Topic
Chatbot Sprint 5/5: Guest Speaker and FAQ Session
Events and Submissions/Topic
Students are expected to develop one question each for the Guest Speaker and focus on finalising the last Assessment.
Module/Topic
Unit Cohort Chatbot Showcase and Reflections
Events and Submissions/Topic
Josef Builder Project Assessment Due and Class Participation marks provided.
Module/Topic
Chapter
Events and Submissions/Topic
1 Practical Assessment
The first assessment task has three parts - Chatbot Topic Idea (5%), Chatbot Design (35%) and Josef Builder project (40%).
Part 1 - Chatbot Topic Idea 5%
Weighting 5%
Reference Style Australian Guide to legal Citation 4th edition
Submission via Moodle
Submission Instructions Individual
Assessment Due Date Week 2 11 March 2024, 11:59PM, AEST.
Assessment Return Date 16 March 2024.
Task Description
Students are expected to work individually to submit via Moodle, a 250-word-maximum description of a legal issue that can be solved using an AI chatbot.
Instructions
Students are to complete the required readings and practical tasks from Week 1 to inspire creative thinking and inform the legal problem they are trying to solve. Students will be provided with examples and methods of identifying and simplifying a legal problem.
Outcomes
Despite being an individual task, the collective nature of the results is designed to increase cohort morale and camaraderie in preparation for the Chatbot Design Assessment.
Part 2 - Chatbot Design 35%
Weighting 35%
Reference Style Australian Guide to legal Citation 4th edition
Submission via Moodle
Submission Instructions Individual
Assessment Due Date Week 6 8 April 2024, 11:59PM, AEST.
Assessment Return Date 22 April 2024.
Task Description
Students are expected to work individually on a chatbot design to solve one of the legal problems identified through the Chatbot Idea Assessment.
Instructions
That chatbot should be designed to answer a layperson’s questions about the legal problem presented. With respect to the assigned legal problem, students will be provided with a proforma Proposal Template to be completed individually:
Step 1: Develop a mind map diagram using a medium of your choice. This may be digital, hand-drawn, excel, or any method which communicates the sub-issues, questions, and answers that apply to this legal problem.
Step 2: Create a flowchart diagram using the mind map diagram as a guide. The flowchart should represent the design for the proposed chatbot using the same medium as above. You may use an alternative medium of expression, as long as it is able to clearly communicate the solution to the reader and meets the Assessment Criteria.
Step 3: Finalise the Proposal justification section, which consists of 500-words. In this section you will need to justify to your reader why you chose this solution with references.
Step 4: Finalise the Mock Use-Case section that details a fictional scenario in which their chatbot would operate, including an assessment of its strengths, weaknesses and recommendations of their chatbot in action for a fictional scenario which consists of 1000-words.
Students will be provided with templates that define the technical terms and should also refer to the material that explains these definitions in Week 1 to assist them in completing this Assessment.
Outcomes
Students will be required to apply critical and creative thinking to create a design that will answer a layperson’s in-depth questions in relation to a legal problem. The aim of the chatbot design is to answer a lay-person’s questions regarding the legal problem. Consider how a layperson would converse with a chatbot regarding this problem. The chatbot is expected to provide a diagrammatic workflow of potential conversations through a question-and-answer approach. Students will need to consolidate all online learning into knowledge to design, describe and justify outcomes. Students' chatbots will be assessed on the depth and efficiency of the design, creative and innovative thinking, and the justification provided in the proforma Proposal Template.
Part 3 - Josef Builder Project 40%
Weighting 40%
Reference Style Australian Guide to legal Citation 4th edition
Submission via Moodle
Submission Instructions One person to submit on behalf of the group.
Assessment Due Date 27 May 2024, 11:59PM, AEST.
Assessment Return Date 3 June 2024.
Task Description
Students are expected to partner with another student and work in pairs. Students who are unable to partner with another student will be paired with another student by the Unit Coordinator. Teams will be required to create a chatbot using an online platform named Josef in response to a legal problem. Teams will also be required to present this chatbot to the Unit cohort at the end of the term.
Instructions
Students will be provided with a license to use the online platform Josef, including their Designer and Builder course materials, for the duration of the Unit. Students are welcome and encouraged to familiarise themselves with this online platform as soon as the Unit begins. Students should complete the previous online activities to assist them in using this platform. This assessment follows a similar process as the Chatbot Design, however you will produce an operational chatbot.
Your chatbot should be trained on a set of questions and potential answers for the assigned legal problem, like the previous assessment in Chatbot Design, and be built using Josef. Students will also be expected to produce the following three items:
- A high-level visual/excel/text flowchart which will be used as the basis for the chatbot design in Josef, to be submitted via Moodle.
- A 250-word maximum explanation of the chatbot and what it is designed to do, which should be included in Josef as the introduction to the chatbot, to also be submitted as a standalone document via Moodle.
- Attend the final tutorial week which will involve a short pitch of the chatbot no longer than 5-minutes in duration.
Students are expected to participate in viewing and contributing to feedback for other student’s presentations. This assessment imposes no limit to creativity, as long as the items created meet the Assessment Criteria. Technical support will be provided from the Unit Coordinator, CQUniversity ICT Department and Josef, as required. Note that the Academic Integrity Policy applies to any support provided to students.
Outcomes
Creating an operational chatbot is designed to consolidate the knowledge acquired across the unit through practical application. Students will test their legal automation skills through this fundamental development. The aim of the chatbot is to answer a lay-person’s questions about a legal problem and will be assessed based on:
- The efficiency of your design
- Simplicity
- Usability
- Creativity
- Final presentation to the Unit Cohort, and
- Clear and concise explanations provided by your chatbot.
All pitches and chatbots, with the consent of the student group(s) submitting, will be consolidated into a final video which can be used to showcase the students ideas to the broader University, and encourage future enrolment in this Unit.
Task 1 due date: 11 March 2024; Task 2 due date: 8 April 2024; Task 3 due date: 27 May 2024.
Task 1 return date: 16 March 2024; Task 2 return date: 22 April 2024; Task 3 return date: 3 June 2024.
Part 1 - Chatbot Topic Idea 5%
| Assessment Criteria | Marks | High Distinction | Distinction | Credit | Pass | Fail |
| Scope | 5 |
Clear and concise identification of one legal issue that can be solved using a chatbot within the scope provided by Week 1 and 2 course materials. |
Clear and concise identification of one legal issue that can be solved using a chatbot partially within scope as defined per the Week 1 and 2 course materials.
|
Clear identification of one legal issue that can be solved using a chatbot with no scope as provided in Week 1 and 2 course materials.
|
Identification of one legal issue that is not well defined and / or outside the scope for a chatbot provided in Week 1 and 2 course materials.
|
No identification of a legal issue that can be solved using an AI chatbot, with no consideration of scope provided in Week 1 and 2 course materials.
|
| Total Marks |
Part 2 - Chatbot Design 35%
| Assessment Criteria | Marks | High Distinction | Distinction | Credit | Pass | Fail |
|
Project definition and scope |
10 |
All parts of the proforma Project Proposal are professionally communicated, succinct yet comprehensive (Step 3: Proposal Justification and Step 4: Mock Use Case), and the definition of the legal problem, including scope, is clear (Step 1: Mindmap and Step 2: Flowchart). |
Most parts of the proforma Project Proposal are clearly communicated, succinct yet comprehensive (Step 3: Proposal Justification and Step 4: Mock Use Case), the legal problem is well defined, including scope (Step 1: Mindmap and Step 2: Flowchart).
|
Some parts of the proforma Project Proposal are clearly communicated, succinct yet comprehensive (Step 3: Proposal Justification and Step 4: Mock Use Case), and defines the legal problem including scope (Step 1: Mindmap and Step 2: Flowchart).
|
Little of the proforma Project Proposal is clearly communicated or comprehensive. Proforma Project Proposal lacks succinctness and poor definition of the problem and its scope. (Step 1: Mindmap, Step 2: Flowchart, Step 3: Proposal Justification, Step 4: Mock Use Case).
|
All parts of the proforma Project Proposal are poorly completed, are not communicated well, are not succinct or comprehensive. Fails to adequately define the problem or scope of the project proposal. (Step 1: Mindmap, Step 2: Flowchart, Step 3: Proposal Justification, Step 4: Mock Use Case).
|
| Presentation | 5 |
Exceptional use of graphics, text, or another alternative medium, to communicate and convey core ideas presented by the mind map and flowchart diagram as required by the Project Proposal. There are no language or grammatical errors identified.
|
Excellent use of graphics, text, or another alternative medium, to communicate and convey core ideas presented by the mind map and flowchart diagram as required by the Project Proposal. There are minor language or grammatical errors identified.
|
Good use of graphics, text, or another alternative medium, to communicate and convey core ideas presented by the mind map and flowchart diagram as required by the Project Proposal. There are some language or grammatical errors identified.
|
Use of graphics, text, or another alternative medium, to communicate and convey core ideas presented by the mind map and flowchart diagram as required by the Project Proposal. Prevalent language or grammatical errors identified.
|
Poor or no use of graphics, text, or another alternative medium. Unable to communicate and convey core ideas presented by the mind map and flowchart diagram as required by the Project Proposal. Prevalent language or grammatical errors identified.
|
| Synthesis | 20 |
All project components have been persuasively brought together logically and creatively. Logical arguments provide excellent justification and referencing. Innovative ideas guide the statements and plans.
|
Most project |
Some project Logical arguments provide some justification and referencing. Minimal use of innovative thinking and ideas to guide the |
Project Logical arguments have minimal justification and referencing. Limited use of innovative thinking and ideas to guide the |
Project has not been Logical arguments are either absent, or present no justification or referencing. No use of innovative thinking and ideas to guide the statements and plans within this project. |
| Total Marks |
|
|
|
|
|
Part 3 - Josef Builder Project 40%
| Assessment Criteria | Marks | High Distinction | Distinction | Credit | Pass | Fail |
| Project Definition and Scope | 15 |
All parts of the chatbot are professionally designed and answers the problem it was designed for. The chatbot is fit for purpose through demonstration of responses to questions within the scope of the legal problem. The chatbot is corroborative of all other materials used in designing the chatbot (Flowchart and Explanation). |
Most parts of the chatbot are well designed and it answers the problem it was designed for. The chatbot is fit for purpose through demonstration of responses to questions within the scope of the legal problem. The chatbot is corroborative of all other materials used in designing the chatbot with some areas unexplained (Flowchart and Explanation). |
Some parts of the chatbot are well designed and it answers the problem it was designed for. The chatbot is fit for purpose through demonstration of responses to questions within the scope of the legal problem. The chatbot is somewhat corroborative of all other materials used in designing the chatbot (Flowchart and Explanation). |
Parts of the chatbot are designed and it sometimes answers the problem it was designed for. The chatbot is somewhat fit for purpose through demonstration of responses to questions within the scope of the legal problem. The chatbot has some, but very limited, corroboration with all other materials used in designing the chatbot (Flowchart and Explanation). |
The chatbot does not answer the problem it was designed for. The chatbot is not fit for purpose and does not accurately respond to questions within the scope of the legal problem. The chatbot does not corroborate the other key materials used in designing the chatbot (Flowchart and Explanation). |
| Presentation | 5 |
Exceptional use of There are no language or grammatical errors identified, including in use of the chatbot. |
Excellent use of There are some language or grammatical errors identified, including in use of the chatbot, but they are barely noticeable. |
Great use of There are some language or grammatical errors identified, including in use of the chatbot, but they are minimal in nature. |
There is use of There are language or grammatical errors identified, including in use of the chatbot. |
The use of graphics, text, or another alternative medium does not effectively communicate and convey core ideas designed to be presented by the flowchart. There is a high prevalence of language or grammatical errors identified, including in use of the chatbot.
|
| Synthesis | 20 |
Project components have been persuasively Logical arguments and The submission professionally synthesizes the purpose, relevance, scope, context, boundaries and |
Project components are well synthesized in a logical and Logical arguments and The submission fully synthesizes the purpose, relevance, scope, context, boundaries and |
Project components are Logical arguments and The submission synthesizes the purpose, relevance, scope, context, boundaries and |
Project components are logical but lack Logical arguments and The submission partially synthesizes the purpose, relevance, scope, context, boundaries and |
Project components have not been Logical arguments and The submission does not synthesize the purpose, relevance, |
| Total Marks |
No submission method provided.
- Apply process improvement and innovation frameworks to the delivery of legal work
- Identify aspects of legal work and new forms of service delivery that can be automated
- Classify what ethical and regulatory issues are presented by lawyering using intelligent machines
- Construct a software application using teamwork that can model legal knowledge and reasoning to perform useful legal work for non lawyers as a form of social innovation.
2 Group Work
Part 1 Participation
Weighting 10%
Referencing Style N/A
Submission N/A
Submission Instructions N/A
Assessment Due Date Throughout Term
Assessment Return Date 31 May 2024, 11:59PM, AEST.
Task Description
The unit Moodle is designed to be engaging through the completion of practical activities and exercises. Visibility of student submissions enables students to engage in critical thinking and creativity. Students are expected to regularly participate in Tutorial zoom sessions and any online activities for the benefit of themselves and their peers. Most importantly, students are expected to both present and attend the presentations of other students for their Josef chatbots and make an active contribution to these presentations.
Instructions
Students are to complete the required readings and practical tasks in Moodle. Students are to attend Tutorial zoom sessions and contribute to any online activities as required. You are encouraged to discuss and debate your ideas in tutorial sessions with respect, courtesy and professionalism to your peers.
Outcomes
This Unit endeavours to provide a unique hybrid-learning environment. Whilst the Unit is held entirely online, the completion of novel and unique online activities are designed to mimic a collective workplace environment. Activities are designed to ensure students are able to meet the Course Learning Outcomes in a fun and engaging way. Gamification will be incorporated where possible. Visibility of ideas and the outcome of other students' activities reduces the isolation of online study and inspires creativity through group-think, which is fundamental to the Unit.
Part 2 Presentation Participation
Weighting 10%
Referencing Style N/A
Submission N/A
Submission Instructions Oral Participation via Zoom
Assessment Due Date Final week of term
Assessment Return Date 31 May 2024, 11:59PM, AEST.
Task Description
Students will make an active contribution to the presentations of other students, through critique and questions.
Instructions Outcomes
The assessment will build on students' ability to positively critique and provide feedback on other students presentations.
Week 12 Friday (31 May 2024)
| Assessment Criteria | Marks | High Distinction | Distinction | Credit | Pass | Fail |
| Attendance | 5 |
Attendance at all 12 online tutorials in the semester. |
Attendance lower than 9 tutorials in the semester. | Attendance lower than 6 tutorials in the semester. | Attendance lower than 3 online tutorials in the semester. | No attendance at any tutorials. |
| Contribution | 5 | Demonstrates leadership in tutorial engagement by asking questions and making contributions to the tutorial group which demonstrate high level of engagement with online learning materials. Punctual attendance to all presentations of chatbots other than the student’s own creation in the final week of classes, in encouraging, being supportive and asking questions of their peers. |
Demonstrates engagement by asking questions and making comments in online and tutorial discussions which demonstrates some engagement with online learning materials. Some demonstration of attendance to presentations of chatbots other than the student’s own creation in the final week of classes, in encouraging, being supportive and asking questions of their peers. |
Demonstrates loose or vague engagement by limited contribution to the tutorials which demonstrates little engagement with online learning materials. Little demonstration of attendance to presentations of chatbots other than the student’s own creation in the final week of classes, in encouraging, being supportive and asking questions of their peers. |
Attends but does not contribute to the tutorials, group learning activities, online materials and tutorial discussion. Absent from other students' presentations for their Josef chatbot. |
Does not contribute to any learning activities or online materials in online and tutorial discussion. Absent from other students' presentations for their Josef chatbot. |
| Presentation critique and feedback | 10 | Professionally delivered and fluent critique and feedback, pitched at the right level. Clear and logical professional communication. Very high standard of positive questions or comments. | Confidently delivered critique and feedback. Minor lapses in fluency, logic and clarity of expression. High standard of positive questions or comments. |
Better than basic standard of delivery of critique and feedback, with a few lapses in fluidity, logic and communication standards. Better than basic visual aids. Good standard of positive questions or comments. |
Basic standard of delivery of critique and feedback, moderate level of lapses in fluidity, logic and communication standards. Mostly positive, basic standard of questions or comments. |
Very poor standard of delivery or critique or feedback, lacking fluency, pitched at the wrong level, ideas not clearly and logically communicated. No questions or comments.
|
| Total Marks |
No submission method provided.
- Construct a software application using teamwork that can model legal knowledge and reasoning to perform useful legal work for non lawyers as a form of social innovation.
As a CQUniversity student you are expected to act honestly in all aspects of your academic work.
Any assessable work undertaken or submitted for review or assessment must be your own work. Assessable work is any type of work you do to meet the assessment requirements in the unit, including draft work submitted for review and feedback and final work to be assessed.
When you use the ideas, words or data of others in your assessment, you must thoroughly and clearly acknowledge the source of this information by using the correct referencing style for your unit. Using others’ work without proper acknowledgement may be considered a form of intellectual dishonesty.
Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in your university study ensures the CQUniversity qualification you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
As a student, you are responsible for reading and following CQUniversity’s policies, including the Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure. This policy sets out CQUniversity’s expectations of you to act with integrity, examples of academic integrity breaches to avoid, the processes used to address alleged breaches of academic integrity, and potential penalties.
What is a breach of academic integrity?
A breach of academic integrity includes but is not limited to plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, cheating, contract cheating, and academic misconduct. The Student Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure defines what these terms mean and gives examples.
Why is academic integrity important?
A breach of academic integrity may result in one or more penalties, including suspension or even expulsion from the University. It can also have negative implications for student visas and future enrolment at CQUniversity or elsewhere. Students who engage in contract cheating also risk being blackmailed by contract cheating services.
Where can I get assistance?
For academic advice and guidance, the Academic Learning Centre (ALC) can support you in becoming confident in completing assessments with integrity and of high standard.
What can you do to act with integrity?
