What Should You Do If Your HSC Work Is Accused of Plagiarism?

If your HSC work is accused of plagiarism, don't immediately rewrite the assignment, delete files, argue with your teacher, or assume you've already lost the marks. Your first job is to understand exactly what has been alleged, preserve the evidence showing how you produced the work, and respond through your school's formal malpractice process.

An accusation is not the same as a finding of malpractice. You should take it seriously, but you also have the right to understand the allegation, explain your work, and have the matter considered under your school's procedures.

The important distinction is where the alleged plagiarism occurred. For an HSC school-based assessment, your school investigates and manages the allegation under its malpractice policy. For suspected malpractice in an HSC examination or an externally submitted component, NESA has a separate investigation and penalty process. These are not interchangeable.

## What should you do first?

There are five sensible steps:

1. Ask for the allegation and the evidence being relied on in writing.
2. Find your school's malpractice policy and appeal procedure.
3. Preserve your drafts, notes, research, references, and version history.
4. Prepare a factual explanation of how you developed the work.
5. Attend the school's review or investigation meeting and follow the stated process.

Don't treat these as five ways to prove your innocence at any cost. They are ways to make sure the school can examine what actually happened rather than relying on an incomplete impression of your submitted work.

[IMAGE: A Year 12 student at a desk reviewing a laptop document with visible version history, handwritten planning notes, printed research sources, and a school assessment notification. The scene should communicate calm evidence-gathering rather than panic.]

## Step 1: Find out exactly what you are being accused of

The word *plagiarism* can cover several different situations. Before you respond, establish which one the school is investigating.

NESA defines plagiarism as pretending to have written, created, or developed work that originated from another source. This can include copying another person's work, using material from the internet without appropriate acknowledgement, or presenting someone else's ideas as your own.

However, plagiarism is not the only form of academic malpractice.

| Type of allegation | What it means |
|---|---|
| Plagiarism | Using another person's words, ideas, or work without appropriate acknowledgement. |
| Collusion | Working with someone else inappropriately on work intended for individual assessment. |
| Misrepresentation | Presenting fabricated or altered information as genuine. |
| Unauthorised AI use | Using AI in a way that breaches the assessment or school requirements. |
| Breach of assessment conditions | Not following the rules set for the task or examination. |

These categories can overlap. For example, submitting an AI-generated paragraph without acknowledging or being permitted to use it could involve unauthorised AI use and plagiarism.

The distinction matters because you need to respond to the actual allegation, not a vague accusation that you have somehow cheated.

### Ask for the allegation in writing

You can politely ask your teacher, head teacher, or the staff member managing the investigation to confirm:

- Which assessment task and which parts of your submission are being questioned.
- Whether the allegation concerns plagiarism, collusion, AI use, or another form of malpractice.
- Which passages, sources, similarities, or other evidence have raised concerns.
- Which school policy and assessment requirements are being applied.
- Who will investigate the matter and who will make the decision.
- How you can provide evidence and explain your work.
- Whether you can bring a parent, carer, or support person to a meeting.
- What the review or appeal procedure is, including any applicable deadlines.

You are not asking the school to drop the allegation. You are asking for enough information to respond properly.

A similarity report, for example, may identify matching text without establishing how that text entered your assignment. The school needs to consider the material in context, including its source, acknowledgement, and your explanation.

[IMAGE: An annotated example of a fictional school email about a suspected plagiarism investigation, with clear callouts identifying the assessment task, disputed passages, evidence cited, relevant policy, response deadline, and review contact. Use fictional details and no real student information.]

### Worked example: A similarity report flags your physics assignment

Your teacher tells you that a plagiarism checker has identified a 24% similarity score in your Year 12 physics research task. You are asked to attend a meeting.

You might immediately think that a 24% score means you have copied almost a quarter of your assignment. That conclusion doesn't follow.

A similarity score measures matching text against material in the software's comparison database. It does not automatically establish plagiarism, determine whether the matching material was acknowledged, or prove that you deliberately copied anything.

For example, the matching material might include:

- Properly referenced quotations.
- A bibliography or standard reference entries.
- Common scientific terminology and equations.
- Text copied from a source without acknowledgement.
- Passages that another student has also submitted.

The school still needs to examine the actual matches and the circumstances surrounding them.

Your response should be specific. Ask which passages are disputed, obtain the relevant information through the school's process, and explain where each passage came from. If you used a source without acknowledging it, be honest about that rather than claiming that the software must be wrong.

A percentage alone is not a verdict.

## Step 2: Preserve your evidence before doing anything else

Your strongest evidence may not be the final document. It may be the collection of small decisions and changes that show how the work developed.

NESA specifically identifies progressive drafts, diaries, journals, notes, working plans, and sketches as possible evidence of your work process. It also notes that students suspected of plagiarism may be asked questions about their submitted work to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding.

Start collecting evidence now. Do not wait until the school asks for a particular file.

### Your evidence checklist

| Evidence | What it can help establish |
|---|---|
| Original drafts | How your writing and explanations developed. |
| Document version history | When sections were created, edited, or substantially changed. |
| Research notes | Which sources you consulted and what information you extracted. |
| Working plans and outlines | How you organised the task before writing the final response. |
| Handwritten calculations or diagrams | How you developed mathematical, scientific, or practical reasoning. |
| Source list and saved articles | Where particular facts, quotations, or ideas originated. |
| Teacher feedback | Which parts of the work were discussed or revised with guidance. |
| Emails and messages | When you discussed the task, received feedback, or sought clarification. |
| Permitted collaboration records | What assistance you received and whether it stayed within the task conditions. |

[IMAGE: A clearly organised evidence collection showing a laptop with successive document drafts, a handwritten outline, annotated textbook pages, a reference list, a dated calculation notebook, and teacher feedback. Use small visual connections to show how these records relate to the final submitted assignment.]

### Keep the original files intact

This is important.

- Save copies of your original documents.
- Export relevant version histories where the platform allows it.
- Keep original research notes and drafts.
- Preserve relevant emails and messages.
- Record when and how you collected each item.
- Store copies securely.

Do not edit old drafts to make them look more convincing. Do not create missing notes and backdate them. Do not delete material that might appear unhelpful.

If you discover an error, such as an unacknowledged paragraph or an incorrectly attributed diagram, explain it accurately. An honest account of a mistake is more useful than a reconstructed account that cannot be supported.

### What if you wrote everything in one document?

You can still provide useful evidence.

For example, you might have:

- Handwritten planning notes.
- A saved research document.
- Browser history showing the sources you consulted.
- Earlier versions in an email attachment.
- A notebook containing calculations used in the assignment.
- Comments or feedback from your teacher.

You may have less evidence than someone who used a document with automatic version history. That does not automatically establish plagiarism. Explain what records you do have and be clear about what you cannot provide.

## Step 3: Compare the allegation with your actual sources and task conditions

Once you understand which passages are being questioned, work through them individually.

Don't simply say, "I didn't copy anything." Explain how each disputed section was produced.

Consider this fictional example:

A student submits a chemistry investigation. The school identifies three passages that resemble an online article.

| Disputed material | What the student finds | Appropriate response |
|---|---|---|
| A sentence explaining collision theory | The wording closely follows the article, but there is no citation. | Acknowledge the source and explain how the wording entered the assignment. |
| A graph interpretation | The student produced the interpretation from their own experimental results. | Provide the original data, calculations, and working notes. |
| A paragraph on reaction rates | The paragraph uses different wording but follows the article's specific explanation and sequence. | Identify the source and explain how the ideas were developed and whether they were acknowledged. |

[IMAGE: A fictional chemistry assignment excerpt placed beside a source article, with three clearly marked comparison areas: a close paraphrase, an independently calculated graph interpretation, and a reworded explanation following the source's argument. Include a small notebook of original experimental results to illustrate the difference between source material and independent analysis.]

Notice that the student cannot use the same explanation for all three passages.

The graph interpretation may be supported by original calculations. The first passage may involve an acknowledgement mistake. The third requires closer examination of how the student used and developed the source material.

The point is to respond to the evidence passage by passage.

If you need a refresher on acknowledging quotations, paraphrases, and ideas, read [How Should You Reference Sources in an HSC Assessment?](https://tutorgum.com/learn/resources/how-should-you-reference-sources-in-an-hsc-assessment/).

If the allegation involves AI, don't assume that saying you only used it for editing resolves the issue. The relevant question is what the tool actually did and whether that use was permitted by the assessment requirements. See [Can You Use AI for HSC Assessments? A Practical Checklist](https://tutorgum.com/learn/resources/can-you-use-ai-for-hsc-assessments-a-practical-boundary-checklist/).

If your HSC work is accused of plagiarism, don't immediately rewrite the assignment, delete files, argue with your teacher, or assume you've already lost the marks. Your first job is to understand exactly what has been alleged, preserve the evidence showing how you produced the work, and respond through your school's formal malpractice process.

An accusation is not the same as a finding of malpractice. You should take it seriously, but you should also understand the allegation, have an opportunity to explain your work, and know how the school will review its decision.

The important distinction is where the alleged plagiarism occurred. For an HSC school-based assessment, your school investigates and manages the allegation under its malpractice policy. For suspected malpractice in an HSC examination or an externally submitted examination component, NESA has a separate investigation and penalty process. These are not interchangeable.

## What should you do first?

There are five sensible steps:

1. Ask for the allegation and the evidence being relied on in writing.
2. Find your school's malpractice policy and appeal procedure.
3. Preserve your drafts, notes, research, references, and version history.
4. Prepare a factual explanation of how you developed the work.
5. Attend the school's investigation or review meeting and follow the stated process.

These are not five ways to prove your innocence at any cost. They are ways to make sure the school can examine what actually happened rather than relying on an incomplete impression of your submitted work.

[IMAGE: A Year 12 student at a desk reviewing a laptop document with visible version history, handwritten planning notes, printed research sources, and a school assessment notification. The scene should communicate calm evidence-gathering rather than panic.]

## Step 1: Find out exactly what you are being accused of

The word *plagiarism* can cover several different situations. Before you respond, establish which one the school is investigating.

NESA defines plagiarism as pretending to have written, created, or developed work that originated from another source. This can include copying another person's work, using material from the internet without appropriate acknowledgement, or presenting someone else's ideas as your own.

However, plagiarism is not the only form of academic malpractice.

| Type of allegation | What it means |
|---|---|
| Plagiarism | Using another person's words, ideas, or work without appropriate acknowledgement. |
| Collusion | Working with someone else inappropriately on work intended for individual assessment. |
| Misrepresentation | Presenting fabricated or altered information as genuine. |
| Unauthorised AI use | Using AI in a way that breaches the assessment or school requirements. |
| Breach of assessment conditions | Not following the rules set for the task or examination. |

These categories can overlap. For example, submitting an AI-generated paragraph without acknowledging it or having permission to use it could involve more than one form of malpractice.

The distinction matters because you need to respond to the actual allegation, not a vague accusation that you have somehow cheated.

### Ask for the allegation in writing

You can politely ask your teacher, head teacher, or the staff member managing the investigation to confirm:

- Which assessment task and which parts of your submission are being questioned.
- Whether the allegation concerns plagiarism, collusion, AI use, or another form of malpractice.
- Which passages, sources, similarities, or other evidence have raised concerns.
- Which school policy and assessment requirements are being applied.
- Who will investigate the matter and who will make the decision.
- How you can provide evidence and explain your work.
- Whether you can bring a parent, carer, or support person to a meeting.
- What the review or appeal procedure is, including any applicable deadlines.

You are not asking the school to drop the allegation. You are asking for enough information to respond properly.

A similarity report, for example, may identify matching text without establishing how that text entered your assignment. The school needs to consider the actual material, including its source, acknowledgement, and your explanation.

[IMAGE: An annotated example of a fictional school email about a suspected plagiarism investigation, with callouts identifying the assessment task, disputed passages, evidence cited, relevant policy, response deadline, and review contact. Use fictional details and no real student information.]

### Worked example: A similarity report flags your physics assignment

Your teacher tells you that a plagiarism checker has identified a 24% similarity score in your Year 12 physics research task. You are asked to attend a meeting.

You might immediately think that a 24% score means you have copied almost a quarter of your assignment. That conclusion doesn't follow.

A similarity score measures matching text against material in the software's comparison database. It does not automatically establish plagiarism, determine whether the matching material was acknowledged, or prove that you deliberately copied anything.

For example, the matching material might include:

- Properly referenced quotations.
- A bibliography or standard reference entries.
- Common scientific terminology and equations.
- Passages copied from a source without acknowledgement.
- Text that another student has also submitted.

The school still needs to examine the actual matches and the circumstances surrounding them.

Your response should be specific. Ask which passages are disputed, obtain the relevant information through the school's process, and explain where each passage came from. If you used a source without acknowledging it, be honest about that rather than claiming that the software must be wrong.

A percentage alone is not a verdict.

## Step 2: Preserve your evidence before doing anything else

Your strongest evidence may not be the final document. It may be the collection of small decisions and changes that show how the work developed.

NESA specifically identifies progressive drafts, diaries, journals, notes, working plans, and sketches as possible evidence of your work process. It also notes that students suspected of plagiarism may be asked questions about their submitted work to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding.

Start collecting evidence now. Don't wait until the school asks for a particular file.

### Your evidence checklist

| Evidence | What it can help establish |
|---|---|
| Original drafts | How your writing and explanations developed. |
| Document version history | When sections were created, edited, or substantially changed. |
| Research notes | Which sources you consulted and what information you extracted. |
| Working plans and outlines | How you organised the task before writing the final response. |
| Handwritten calculations or diagrams | How you developed mathematical, scientific, or practical reasoning. |
| Source list and saved articles | Where particular facts, quotations, or ideas originated. |
| Teacher feedback | Which parts of the work were discussed or revised with guidance. |
| Emails and messages | When you discussed the task, received feedback, or sought clarification. |
| Permitted collaboration records | What assistance you received and whether it stayed within the task conditions. |

[IMAGE: A clearly organised evidence collection showing a laptop with successive document drafts, a handwritten outline, annotated textbook pages, a reference list, a dated calculation notebook, and teacher feedback. Use subtle visual connections to show how these records relate to the final submitted assignment.]

### Keep the original files intact

This is important.

- Save copies of your original documents.
- Export relevant version histories where the platform allows it.
- Keep original research notes and drafts.
- Preserve relevant emails and messages.
- Record when and how you collected each item.
- Store copies securely.

Do not edit old drafts to make them look more convincing. Do not create missing notes and backdate them. Do not delete material that might appear unhelpful.

If you discover an error, such as an unacknowledged paragraph or an incorrectly attributed diagram, explain it accurately. An honest account of a mistake is more useful than a reconstructed account that cannot be supported.

### What if you wrote everything in one document?

You can still provide useful evidence.

For example, you might have:

- Handwritten planning notes.
- A saved research document.
- Browser history showing the sources you consulted.
- Earlier versions in an email attachment.
- A notebook containing calculations used in the assignment.
- Comments or feedback from your teacher.

You may have less evidence than someone who used a document with automatic version history. That does not automatically establish plagiarism. Explain what records you do have and be clear about what you cannot provide.

## Step 3: Compare the allegation with your actual sources and task conditions

Once you understand which passages are being questioned, work through them individually.

Don't simply say, "I didn't copy anything." Explain how each disputed section was produced.

Consider this fictional example.

A student submits a chemistry investigation. The school identifies three passages that resemble an online article.

| Disputed material | What the student finds | Appropriate response |
|---|---|---|
| A sentence explaining collision theory | The wording closely follows the article, but there is no citation. | Acknowledge the source and explain how the wording entered the assignment. |
| A graph interpretation | The student produced the interpretation from their own experimental results. | Provide the original data, calculations, and working notes. |
| A paragraph on reaction rates | The paragraph uses different wording but follows the article's specific explanation and sequence. | Identify the source and explain how the ideas were developed and whether they were acknowledged. |

[IMAGE: A fictional chemistry assignment excerpt placed beside a source article, with three clearly marked comparison areas: a close paraphrase, an independently calculated graph interpretation, and a reworded explanation following the source's argument. Include a small notebook of original experimental results to illustrate the difference between source material and independent analysis.]

Notice that the student cannot use the same explanation for all three passages.

The graph interpretation may be supported by original calculations. The first passage may involve an acknowledgement mistake. The third requires closer examination of how the student used and developed the source material.

The point is to respond to the evidence passage by passage.

If you need a refresher on acknowledging quotations, paraphrases, and ideas, read [How Should You Reference Sources in an HSC Assessment?](https://tutorgum.com/learn/resources/how-should-you-reference-sources-in-an-hsc-assessment/).

### What if the allegation involves AI?

AI-related allegations need particular care because the rules have an important distinction.

NESA's ACE Rule 10.1.2, updated on 16 September 2026, requires schools to **not rely on software tools for the detection of generative AI when determining whether malpractice has occurred**.

This means an AI detector's prediction is not an appropriate basis on which a school can rely to determine that you committed malpractice.

If your school tells you that an AI detection score proves you used ChatGPT or another generative AI tool, ask what other evidence is being considered and how the investigation is applying the current NESA rule.

However, this does not mean AI use is automatically permitted.

Schools and school sectors remain responsible for setting requirements around generative AI use in school-based assessments. Using AI to produce explanations, paragraphs, calculations, or other submitted material may breach your task requirements, even if you subsequently edit the output.

If you did use AI, be specific about what you used it for:

- Did you ask it to explain a concept?
- Did it suggest an outline or structure?
- Did it generate sentences or paragraphs?
- Did you use it to check grammar?
- Did you incorporate its calculations or explanations?
- Did your assessment notification permit that particular use?

Preserve relevant prompts, outputs, and document versions if they exist. Explain what you actually did rather than describing all AI use as simple proofreading.

The school's AI policy and the specific assessment conditions matter here. Read [Can You Use AI for HSC Assessments? A Practical Checklist](https://tutorgum.com/learn/resources/can-you-use-ai-for-hsc-assessments-a-practical-boundary-checklist/) before assuming that one type of AI assistance is equivalent to another.

## Step 4: Prepare a clear explanation of how you produced the work

Once you have gathered your evidence, prepare a short chronological account.

You should be able to explain:

1. When you started the task.
2. How you planned your response.
3. Which sources you consulted.
4. How you developed the main arguments, calculations, or explanations.
5. What assistance you received.
6. Which changes you made after receiving feedback.
7. How you produced the final submission.

You do not need to create an elaborate story. You need to explain what happened in a way that matches your records.

A useful approach is to prepare a table.

| Issue raised | What actually happened | Supporting evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Similar wording in the introduction | I used a textbook explanation and failed to cite it. | Saved textbook reference and original notes. |
| Similar calculations | I independently completed the calculations using my experimental data. | Laboratory notebook and calculation drafts. |
| Different writing style in the conclusion | I revised the conclusion after receiving teacher feedback. | Earlier draft and teacher comments. |

This structure makes it easier to distinguish an acknowledgement mistake from an allegation that someone else produced your work.

### Explain what you understand

You may be asked questions about the assignment itself.

For a physics report, you might be asked to explain why you used a particular equation or how you obtained a calculated value.

For a chemistry investigation, you might need to explain the reaction, justify a conclusion, or describe how experimental results support your argument.

For a mathematics task, you might be asked to reproduce a derivation or explain why a particular method works.

These questions are not necessarily an examination of your memory. They can help establish whether you understand the material you submitted.

Prepare by reviewing the actual task, your working, and the sources you used.

If you cannot remember something, say so. Guessing or pretending to understand a calculation is unlikely to help.

### What should you say if you made a genuine mistake?

Suppose you copied a definition from an online source and forgot to include the reference.

A sensible response would be:

> I can see that this sentence is very similar to the source identified. I used that source when researching the topic but failed to acknowledge it in the final submission. I understand that this was a referencing error. I would like the rest of my work to be considered separately, as I have drafts and calculations showing how those sections were developed.

This response does two things.

First, it acknowledges the part you can verify. Second, it avoids accepting responsibility for parts of the assignment that have not been properly examined.

Don't deny something that your own records clearly establish. Equally, don't agree that an entire assignment was copied simply because one passage was not referenced correctly.

## Step 5: Attend the school's investigation meeting

If the school asks you to attend a meeting, take it seriously.

Before attending, confirm:

- Who will be present.
- What specific allegations will be discussed.
- Whether the school will provide the relevant evidence beforehand.
- Whether you can bring a parent, carer, or support person under the school's arrangements.
- Whether you can provide a written statement and supporting documents.
- How the school will record your response.
- When and how you will receive the decision.

During the meeting, keep your explanations factual.

You can ask the school to clarify a particular passage, explain why a source has been identified as problematic, or distinguish between an allegation of plagiarism and an allegation of collusion.

If you disagree with something presented, explain why and refer to the relevant evidence.

For example:

"I understand why this passage has been flagged. However, I have an earlier draft showing that I developed this explanation before consulting the source identified. Could we consider that document as part of the investigation?"

That is much more useful than simply saying the accusation is unfair.

### Keep a record of the meeting

Afterwards, make a note of:

- The date and attendees.
- The allegations discussed.
- The evidence you provided.
- Any questions you were asked.
- Any further information requested.
- Any deadlines given.
- What the school said would happen next.

If something important was misunderstood, send a polite written clarification.

Also request the final decision in writing, including the reasons for the finding, the penalty, and the applicable review procedure.

[IMAGE: A student sitting at a school meeting table with a teacher and year adviser, reviewing a printed assessment, a written response, and supporting documents. Show a calm, professional discussion rather than a disciplinary confrontation.]

## Who actually investigates an HSC plagiarism allegation?

This is where students can become confused. NESA, your school, an external education provider, and UAC have different responsibilities.

Understanding which organisation is involved helps you avoid sending an appeal to the wrong place.

### 1. Your school: school-based assessment tasks

For ordinary HSC school-based assessments, your school is responsible for identifying and managing suspected malpractice.

NESA's ACE Rules require schools to develop their own malpractice policies and procedures. Those policies must specify:

- How suspected malpractice is investigated.
- Who makes the decision.
- The possible penalties.
- How students can appeal.
- Who makes decisions about appeals.
- That confirmed HSC school-based malpractice offences are recorded in the Malpractice Register.

Your school's policy is therefore essential.

There is no single statewide penalty that automatically applies to every school-based plagiarism allegation. The school must follow its own published policy and the applicable NESA requirements.

A finding may result in a reduced mark, zero marks, or another penalty permitted under the school's policy. You should check the actual penalty range rather than relying on what happened to a student at another school.

### 2. NESA: HSC examinations and examination components

NESA has a separate process for suspected malpractice in HSC examinations and HSC minimum standard tests.

The Examination Rules Committee (ERC) considers these cases.

Under the NESA rules, if suspected malpractice occurs in an HSC examination or minimum standard test, NESA will notify the student and provide an opportunity to formally respond. The student may also be invited to attend a meeting.

Possible penalties for malpractice in an HSC examination include:

- Reduced examination marks.
- Zero marks for the examination.
- Cancellation of the course.

Depending on the circumstances, these penalties may affect HSC or RoSA eligibility.

This is different from a school investigating a suspected plagiarism offence in an ordinary assessment task.

For the official requirements, see [NESA's ACE Rules on breaches and malpractice](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules/ace10/malpractice).

### 3. External education providers

Some students complete HSC courses through an external provider rather than directly through their home school.

NESA's external-provider rules allocate responsibilities between schools and providers. For Stage 6 courses, external providers have responsibilities for determining and submitting HSC assessment results and processing certain assessment appeals. The home school retains important responsibilities for the student.

If you receive a plagiarism allegation from an external provider, ask both the provider and your home school to confirm:

- Which organisation is investigating the allegation.
- Which malpractice policy applies.
- Who will make the decision.
- Where you should submit your evidence.
- Which organisation handles the review or appeal.
- What deadlines apply.

Do not assume that an external provider follows exactly the same investigation procedure as your home school.

You can check the relevant requirements in [NESA's external-provider rules](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules/ace13/external-provider).

### 4. UAC and university admission

A school-based plagiarism allegation is not something you appeal through UAC.

UAC processes undergraduate applications and preferences. Universities and other participating institutions decide which applicants receive offers.

For most Year 12 applicants, selection is based primarily on their selection rank, which usually combines their ATAR and applicable adjustment factors. Individual institutions also set their own course admission requirements.

If a confirmed school-based malpractice finding affects an assessment mark or your eventual HSC results, the possible effect on university admission will depend on the resulting academic record and the course's selection requirements.

If this happens:

- Ask your school how the decision affects your assessment results.
- Contact NESA if you need clarification about your HSC record.
- Contact UAC about your application and relevant offer deadlines.
- Contact the university directly if you have questions about its course admission requirements or an existing offer.

UAC cannot overturn a school's malpractice decision or direct a university to make you an offer.

You can check current application arrangements through [UAC's undergraduate applications and offers information](https://uac.edu.au/current-applicants/undergraduate-applications-and-offers).

## What happens if the school finds that malpractice occurred?

If the school determines that malpractice has occurred, ask for the outcome in writing.

You should understand:

- Which specific conduct was found to constitute malpractice.
- Which evidence supported the decision.
- Which section of the school policy was applied.
- What penalty has been imposed.
- Whether the decision applies to the whole task or only part of it.
- Whether the school will record the offence in the NESA Malpractice Register.
- How and when you can appeal.

NESA requires schools to record malpractice offences in HSC school-based assessment tasks in the state-wide Malpractice Register.

This is an administrative record of offences and penalties, not a publicly searchable list of students. NESA publishes aggregated malpractice information.

Importantly, a finding of malpractice does not mean you should stop asking questions about the decision. You should still understand the evidence, the reasoning, and whether the correct procedure was followed.

## Can you appeal a plagiarism finding?

Yes. However, the appeal route depends on the type of assessment and decision.

For an HSC school-based assessment malpractice finding, NESA's ACE Rule 10.1.2 states that student appeals must be resolved at the school level.

This means you should follow the appeal procedure in your school's malpractice policy. NESA does not provide a separate external appeal process for overturning an ordinary school-based malpractice finding.

Your school must specify the appeal process and the person or people responsible for deciding it.

### What should your appeal focus on?

A useful appeal identifies a specific problem with the original decision.

For example:

| Possible appeal ground | What you would explain |
|---|---|
| Incorrect factual finding | The school has misunderstood where a passage originated. |
| Relevant evidence overlooked | Your original drafts or research notes were not considered. |
| Incorrect policy application | The school applied a rule that does not match the task requirements. |
| Inadequate investigation | The decision was made without properly examining the disputed material. |
| Incorrect categorisation | The school treated permitted collaboration as collusion without considering the task conditions. |
| Penalty issue | The penalty does not appear consistent with the school's published policy. |

A strong appeal is not simply a longer version of your original denial.

It identifies what was wrong with the decision and supports that point with evidence.

### What if you receive an N determination?

An N determination means your principal has determined that you have not satisfactorily completed the requirements of a course.

This is different from an ordinary penalty for a school-based malpractice offence.

If you receive an N determination, there is a separate course non-completion appeal process. You can first seek a review at your school. If the school rejects your appeal, you may be able to appeal to NESA under the applicable N determination procedures.

Do not assume that every plagiarism finding automatically produces an N determination. They are separate decisions with different requirements and appeal arrangements.

See [NESA's course non-completion and appeals rules](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules/ace4/course-non-completions) if this situation applies to you.

## What should you avoid doing?

Some responses can make an already difficult situation worse.

| Avoid | Why |
|---|---|
| Deleting drafts or messages | You may destroy useful evidence of your work process. |
| Editing old documents to make them look original | This can undermine the credibility of your evidence. |
| Asking another student to change their story | This may create a separate concern about collusion or assisting malpractice. |
| Inventing sources or explanations | Fabricated information can amount to misrepresentation. |
| Making blanket denials | They may be contradicted by the evidence. |
| Ignoring meeting invitations or deadlines | You may lose the opportunity to respond effectively. |
| Posting accusations about teachers or classmates online | It can escalate the situation without helping resolve the allegation. |
| Assuming an AI detector or similarity score is a final verdict | Software results must be considered within the applicable NESA rules and school process. |

The best approach is straightforward: preserve your records, understand the allegation, respond honestly, and follow the formal process.

## Questions and solutions

### Question 1

Your Year 12 English teacher tells you that your assessment has been flagged for possible plagiarism. You have not received any written explanation.

What should you do first?

### Solution 1

Ask the teacher or staff member managing the investigation to provide the allegation and relevant information in writing. You should also preserve your original drafts, notes, and research.

You need to know which parts of the assessment are being questioned, what evidence has raised concerns, which school policy applies, and how you can respond.

A vague accusation is not enough information to prepare a meaningful explanation. Don't immediately deny everything or start rewriting your work. First establish what the school is actually investigating.

### Question 2

A student submits a 1,500-word biology investigation. A similarity report identifies a 28% match with existing online material.

After examining the report, the student discovers that:

- 10% of the matches come from the reference list.
- 8% come from common biological terminology and standard descriptions.
- Two paragraphs contain wording copied from an online source without acknowledgement.
- The remaining material has no obvious connection to the identified sources.

The student has original research notes and progressive drafts.

How should the student respond?

### Solution 2

The student should address each disputed section separately rather than relying on the overall 28% score.

The reference list and common terminology should be considered in context. The two unacknowledged paragraphs should be acknowledged honestly, with an explanation of where they originated.

The original research notes and progressive drafts should be provided to support the development of the remaining work.

The tempting response is to argue that the 28% figure is meaningless because much of it comes from references and standard terminology. However, that does not resolve the two paragraphs that genuinely match an unacknowledged source.

The correct approach is to separate legitimate matches from problematic material and allow the school to consider the evidence for each part.

### Question 3

A student is accused of using generative AI to write a mathematics investigation. The school presents an AI detection report that gives the submission a 93% AI-generated probability.

The student denies using generative AI and has handwritten calculations, planning notes, and several drafts.

The school says the detection report proves that AI was used.

What should the student do?

### Solution 3

The student should ask the school to identify the other evidence supporting the allegation and explain how it is applying NESA's current malpractice rules.

Under ACE Rule 10.1.2, updated on 16 September 2026, schools must not rely on software tools for the detection of generative AI when determining whether malpractice has occurred.

The student should provide the original calculations, notes, and drafts, and explain how the investigation developed.

However, the student should not assume that producing handwritten work automatically resolves every concern. The school may consider other relevant evidence and ask questions about the submitted investigation.

The key distinction is that an AI detector's prediction cannot be relied on to determine malpractice. It is not a substitute for an investigation based on appropriate evidence.

### Question 4

A student completes an HSC physics course through an external education provider while remaining enrolled at their home school.

The provider emails the student alleging plagiarism in a submitted investigation. The provider says the home school is responsible for handling the complaint. The home school says the provider manages the assessment.

The student has only three days before the stated response deadline.

What should the student do?

### Solution 4

The student should immediately ask both organisations to confirm in writing who is responsible for investigating the allegation, which policy applies, and where the response must be submitted.

NESA's external-provider rules allocate assessment responsibilities between providers and schools. External providers have responsibilities for determining HSC assessment results and processing certain assessment appeals, while the home school retains important responsibilities for the student.

The student should not allow the disagreement between the organisations to cause them to miss the response deadline.

They should ask for confirmation of the deadline and, if necessary, request an extension through the appropriate process.

The tempting approach is to assume that one organisation must take complete responsibility because the other has referred the student elsewhere. That does not establish the correct procedure. The relevant NESA requirements and the arrangements between the provider and school need to be clarified.

### Question 5

A student submits an individual HSC physics research report. The assessment notification states that the analysis and conclusion must be written independently. The school's policy permits general feedback from tutors but prohibits tutors from writing or rewriting submitted work.

The student's evidence includes:

- Handwritten experimental results and original calculations.
- Several drafts showing how the introduction and first two sections developed.
- An email from a private tutor containing two rewritten analysis paragraphs and a rewritten conclusion.
- A final document showing that the student pasted the tutor's revised sections into the submission.

The tutor's rewritten conclusion also contains wording that closely matches an online physics article. The student says they did not know the tutor had used that article.

The school alleges that the entire report is plagiarised.

The student argues:

"I did all the experiments and calculations myself. I wrote most of the report, so the plagiarism accusation must be wrong."

How should the student respond, and what does the evidence actually establish?

### Solution 5

The student should provide a section-by-section account, acknowledge the tutor's rewriting, and distinguish between the allegation of plagiarism and the separate issue of unauthorised assistance.

The original experimental results, calculations, and progressive drafts provide evidence that the student independently developed those parts of the report.

However, they do not establish that every section of the final submission was independently written.

There are two separate questions to consider.

**First: Did the student plagiarise the online article?**

The student says they did not consult or copy from that article. If this is accurate, they should explain how the tutor supplied the revised text and provide the relevant email.

The school should examine the source match and establish what material was used, how it entered the submission, and whether the student appropriately acknowledged any external material.

The student's lack of knowledge about the tutor's source is relevant to understanding what happened, but it does not automatically resolve the question of whether unacknowledged material was presented as the student's own.

**Second: Did the tutor contribute too much to an individual assessment?**

This is a separate issue.

NESA identifies submitting work substantially contributed to by another person, including a tutor or subject expert, as a possible form of malpractice.

The assessment notification also explicitly prohibited tutors from rewriting submitted work. The student pasted two rewritten paragraphs and a conclusion into the final report.

Even if the student did not directly copy the online article, this assistance may still constitute malpractice under the applicable school policy.

The student's most tempting argument is that the experimental work and calculations were entirely their own. That may be true, but it does not establish that the final written analysis and conclusion were independently produced.

A better response would be to:

- Provide the original drafts and calculations.
- Disclose the tutor's email and identify the sections they rewrote.
- Explain accurately what the student wrote independently.
- Clarify whether the student knew about the online article.
- Ask the school to distinguish the plagiarism allegation from the allegation of unauthorised assistance.
- Request that each part of the submission and the relevant evidence be considered separately.

The important point is that proving who produced the original calculations does not establish who produced the final written explanation.

This is why understanding the exact allegation matters. A student can have substantial evidence of independent work while still needing to explain a separate breach of the assessment conditions.

## Where to check the official rules

The following sources are useful when checking the requirements that apply to your situation.

| Organisation | Official resource | What to check |
|---|---|---|
| NESA | [ACE Rules](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules) | Current malpractice rules and school responsibilities. |
| NESA | [Breaches and malpractice](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules/ace10/malpractice) | Plagiarism definitions, school procedures, AI detection requirements, appeals, and penalties. |
| NESA | [HSC information](https://www.nsw.gov.au/education-and-training/nesa/hsc) | General HSC requirements and student information. |
| NSW Government | [2026 HSC Rules and Procedures](https://www.nsw.gov.au/education-and-training/nesa/hsc/rules-and-procedures/2026-guide/before-you-start-your-hsc) | Requirements for the 2026 HSC cohort. |
| NSW Government | [2027 HSC Rules and Procedures](https://www.nsw.gov.au/education-and-training/nesa/hsc/2027-rules-and-procedures/2027-guide/what-do-i-need-to-do-to-get-my-hsc) | Requirements for the 2027 HSC cohort. |
| NESA | [External-provider rules](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules/ace13/external-provider) | Responsibilities when studying through an external provider. |
| NESA | [Non-completion and appeals](https://curriculum.nsw.edu.au/ace-rules/ace4/course-non-completions) | Separate procedures for N determinations. |
| UAC | [Undergraduate applications and offers](https://uac.edu.au/current-applicants/undergraduate-applications-and-offers) | University applications, preferences, offer arrangements, and current deadlines. |

Always check the rules for your own HSC cohort. School policies, assessment conditions, and external-provider arrangements may also differ.

## The next step: make your assessment process easier to defend

The most useful protection against a future plagiarism allegation is a clear record of how you develop your work.

Keep your research notes, save progressive drafts, reference sources as you use them, and check the assessment notification before accepting help from another person or using AI.

In particular, understand the difference between receiving feedback and having someone else produce part of your submission.

You can read [How to Read an HSC Assessment Notification Effectively](https://tutorgum.com/learn/resources/how-to-read-an-hsc-assessment-notification-weighting-outcomes-and-marking-criteria/) to understand the task requirements before you begin.

If an allegation does arise, remember the central principle: respond to the specific evidence, preserve your original work, and use the correct review process. You do not need to panic, but you do need to take each step seriously.