There are “serious weaknesses” in the administration of student misconduct.
The university’s Code of Student Conduct may well provide a “well-structured regime” for responding to complaints of misconduct following substantial revision – but it has been implemented “without proper preparation”.
Separating academic and non-academic misconduct in the rewrite may well have been a sensible move – but an “insufficiently robust” student conduct team is operating with “inadequate resource”.
The university has in place a variety of support arrangements for students and staff – but there are “inconsistencies” in the treatment of cases and in record keeping, and most cases are subject to “serious delays”.
Staff responsible are “doing their best” – but it is a situation that is “unsustainable” and “carries a high level of risk”, where “urgent attention is needed.”
