Academic Integrity & Anti-Plagiarism Policy

1. Purpose

Ignited Minds Academy is committed to maintaining honesty, originality, transparency and ethical responsibility in all academic, professional, research and training activities.

This policy defines academic misconduct and establishes standards for original work, proper attribution, responsible use of sources and ethical use of artificial intelligence.

2. Scope

This policy applies to:

• Course materials
• Presentations
• Assignments
• Assessments
• Research proposals
• Projects
• Case studies
• Articles
• Reports
• Training manuals
• Learning resources
• Certificate-course submissions
• Mentorship outputs
• Promotional academic content
• Programme recordings and transcripts

It applies to mentors, trainers, participants, reviewers, evaluators and employees.

3. Academic Integrity Principles

All academic and professional work should demonstrate:

• Honesty
• Originality
• Proper attribution
• Accuracy
• Accountability
• Transparency
• Responsible authorship
• Respect for intellectual property
• Ethical use of technology

4. Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the presentation of another person's words, ideas, research, structure, data, images, methods or creative work as one's own without proper acknowledgment.

Plagiarism may include:

• Copying text without quotation or citation
• Close paraphrasing without acknowledgment
• Copying from websites, books or articles
• Reusing another learner's work
• Submitting purchased or commissioned work
• Translating material without citing the source
• Reusing images, graphs or tables without attribution
• Presenting AI-generated content as fully original without required disclosure
• Copying programme materials without permission

5. Types of Academic Misconduct

Academic misconduct includes:

Direct Plagiarism

Copying material word-for-word without citation.

Mosaic Plagiarism

Combining copied phrases or ideas from multiple sources while making only minor changes.

Self-Plagiarism

Reusing one's previously submitted, published or assessed work without appropriate disclosure.

Fabrication

Inventing data, results, references, experience, credentials or evidence.

Falsification

Manipulating or selectively altering data, documents, findings or records.

Contract Cheating

Having another person or service complete assessed work.

Collusion

Unauthorised cooperation between participants.

Impersonation

Submitting work or attending assessments on behalf of another person.

Citation Manipulation

Using false, irrelevant or fabricated references.

Assessment Misconduct

Using unauthorised resources, devices, notes or assistance.

Misuse of Artificial Intelligence

Using AI to produce work contrary to programme instructions or presenting AI output without verification or disclosure where required.

6. Responsibilities of Program Mentors

Mentors and trainers must:

• Prepare original or properly licensed materials.
• Cite third-party sources.
• Verify references and factual claims.
• Clearly explain assessment rules.
• Communicate whether AI tools are permitted.
• Avoid using plagiarised slides or course content.
• Protect confidential participant submissions.
• Evaluate work fairly.
• Declare any conflict affecting assessment.
• Report suspected misconduct responsibly.

7. Responsibilities of Participants

Participants must:

• Submit their own work.
• Cite all sources appropriately.
• Follow assessment instructions.
• Keep drafts and source records where required.
• Not share answers during individual assessments.
• Not submit AI output without review and required disclosure.
• Not fabricate references, interviews, data or results.
• Cooperate with any integrity review.

8. Use of Similarity-Detection Tools

IMA may use plagiarism or similarity-detection software to review submitted work.

A similarity percentage alone does not determine misconduct. Reports should be interpreted by considering:

• Correctly quoted text
• References
• Standard technical phrases
• Properly cited sources
• Subject-specific terminology
• Previously published work
• Nature of the assignment

IMA may request clarification, source files or revised work.

9. Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

AI tools may be used only where permitted by the programme or assignment.

Permitted uses may include:

• Idea generation
• Language improvement
• Summarisation
• Coding assistance
• Research planning
• Practice questions
• Administrative support

The user remains responsible for:

• Accuracy
• Originality
• Bias review
• Citation
• Factual verification
• Ethical compliance
• Confidentiality
• Final authorship

AI must not be used to:

• Fabricate sources
• Produce deceptive research
• Complete prohibited assessments
• Impersonate another person
• Generate false data
• Hide plagiarism
• Bypass learning outcomes
• Upload confidential information without permission

10. Disclosure of AI Assistance

Where required, users should disclose:

• The AI tool used
• The purpose of use
• The section influenced by AI
• The extent of human review
• Any material changes made

IMA may require a specific AI-use declaration for assignments or programme materials.

11. Authorship and Attribution

Authorship should be granted only to individuals who made a meaningful intellectual contribution.

Individuals must not:

• Add honorary authors
• Exclude genuine contributors
• Misrepresent authorship order
• Use another person's name without consent
• Claim institutional affiliation without authority

Contributors who do not qualify as authors should be acknowledged appropriately.

12. Investigation Process

Where academic misconduct is suspected, IMA may:

• Place the submission or certification status under review.
• Notify the concerned person.
• Share the concern and available evidence.
• Request a written explanation.
• Review the original files and sources.
• Consult an academic reviewer where required.
• Determine whether misconduct occurred.
• Communicate the outcome.

The person concerned should be given a reasonable opportunity to respond.

13. Possible Outcomes

Depending on severity, IMA may:

• Request correction
• Require resubmission
• Reduce assessment marks
• Mark an assignment as unsuccessful
• Reject a submission
• Withhold or cancel a certificate
• Remove plagiarised content
• Suspend programme access
• Suspend a mentor
• Terminate an association
• Inform an institution
• Refer serious misconduct to relevant authorities

14. Appeals

A person may appeal an academic-integrity decision by submitting:

• Grounds for appeal
• Relevant evidence
• Explanation of procedural concerns
• Any new information unavailable earlier

An appeal must ordinarily be submitted within 15 working days of the decision.

15. Record Keeping

IMA may retain records of academic-integrity matters for administrative, legal and quality-assurance purposes.

Such records will be handled confidentially.

16. Preventive Education

IMA may provide:

• Citation guidance
• Academic-writing support
• Research-integrity sessions
• Responsible-AI training
• Assessment instructions
• Mentor orientation

The objective is to prevent misconduct and build responsible academic practices.