DS has been an idiot - plagiarism. What is the likely outcome?

[fumps]

DS's coursework for an A'level standard qualification has been sent back to the school because he plagiarised work from another student in one of the modules.

He has 'fessed up to copying from a memory stick given to him by the other pupil (who is also in trouble for handing over his work), and his school has to submit a report to the examining board.

It was an incredibly stupid thing to do, and looking at the exam board website, he risks a range of penalties which go as far as not letting him sit any more exams.

He's predicted AAB in the 3 other subjects at A2 and in his defence was suffering a range of legitimate pressures at the time including his own long-standing disability, recovering from another short-term but serious illness and bereavement - he looked for a shortcut to get the coursework done rather than talk to his teachers or even us, his parents, about relieving the pressure.

I hope the school will reflect that in their report - they know he's been depressed and is having treatment - but does anyone here (especially anyone working for an examining body) have idea what the likely penalty might be in reality?

The plagiarised work represents a section of about a sixth of the overall qualification. My hope is that he will be awarded 0 for that section and be allowed to re-do it, but that might be over-optimistic.

The only positive is that he has learned this lesson now, not at university or A2 (if he can now get that far).

It is really disheartening that people don't understand the key principles surrounding ANY disability.

1. Everybody is individual and a disability may cause one person to act/behave differently than an other with the same disability.
2. The LAW says that schools (and other establishments) must make reasonable adjustments. (That is so that people with a disability are NOT put at a disadvantage).

No one is "making excuses" for what the OP's son did.

We are simply asking the question: Did the school do what they legally must do and make reasonable adjustments for him? If they did not, then was the YP put at a disadvantage (ie. not enough time to complete the work). If that is the case, then a thorough investigation needs to be done. It is NOT an excuse, the damage is done, but the OP's son has learnt a hard lesson.

Is it not right that if the school have not complied with their legal obligations, then they too have a lesson to learn here?

It is really disheartening that people don't understand the key principles surrounding ANY disability.

Actually I do, as I said above. The key word is reasonable. Eg a shop could put a ramp to allow a wheelchair user to access the shop - reasonable.

Or they can have a bell to ring and a member of staff come out to serve someone - again reasonable.

But a disabled person demanding a discount because of their disability isn't reasonable.

A diabetic going into a shop, grabbing a can of coke and drinking it without paying because they are having a hypo is one thing, a deaf person going in to a shop grabbing a can and drinking without paying is another.

The diabetic is not functioning properly they know they need a sugar and their behaviour is directly caused by their diabetes, the deaf person's behaviour is not.

Did the school do what they legally must do and make reasonable adjustments for him? If they did not, then was the YP put at a disadvantage (ie. not enough time to complete the work). If that is the case, then a thorough investigation needs to be done. It is NOT an excuse, the damage is done, but the OP's son has learnt a hard lesson.

They may or may not be linked but one did not cause another. And IF one did then that MAY means his needs cannot be met by reasonable adjustment.

Don't you see how dangerous this could be for the OP's son if you do prove that his dishonesty was caused by his disability and his needs not being met?

I will repeat, the school only needs to make 'reasonable adjustments', if they cannot meet his needs by reasonable adjustment they have a legal right to say they cannot meet his needs.

Extreme, very extreme example. Ian Brady. He has a mental disability. He has a legal right not to be discriminated against. But this is trumped by him being dangerous. He is directly discriminated against, quite legally because his needs cannot be met outside a secure psychiatric unit.

What the OP's son has done was not a one off like a diabetic stealing coke due to a hypo. It is a measured calculated theft that took planning, discussion with another student, coercing the student in to handing over work, printing it out, signing the declaration that it is his, handing it in, getting the feedback from the teacher and still keep quiet.

This took place over a period of time.

If the school cannot meet his needs by 'reasonable adjustment' and to be honest if I was his teacher I'd be wondering what I could do / what strategies could be in place to stop him doing it again.

Lionessnurturingcubs what 'reasonable adjustments' do you think could have been in place to stop him cheating?

If his disability leads him to this behaviour then what can be done to help him? As I said before it might be the best option to not allow him to do course work based assessments. That is a 'reasonable adjustment' let him sit another AS level instead of this qualification.

And as I said before this will follow him to uni, not as a mistake made by a teenager but as someone who has a medical condition that makes him cheat.

Woa! Really? Compare this to Ian Brady?

To answer your question Sassh: (although it's sorely tempting to abandon the thread altogether):
A very reasonable adjustment would have been to given the YP more time to do his course work.

Your examples of a diabetic and a deaf person with the coke, are not relevant because in this case, and what many on this thread seem unable to grasp, It is not the disability that caused the plagiarism, IT IS THE LACK OF REASONABLE ADJUSTMENTS.

He did not commit plagiarism because he has a disability. He committed it because he didn't have enough time to do the coursework (due to being off sick, medical appointments, ie. because of his disability).

Why do you think these laws exist? What is the point of having a law that says schools must make reasonable adjustments, if they then don't and a YP fails? It is to support that YP, and he did not get that support. Because of his disability, and because of the lack of adjustments he only had two options:- Fail by not handing in ANY coursework, or risk plagiarism and hope he gets away with it. Plagiarism was obviously not a good choice, but the point here is:

He was never given the option to succeed, (because of the impact of his diability) like the other candidates were. And the law says he must be.

And please, what Elibean says.

I tend to agree that the essential mistake the OP's ds made - ie cheating, rather than asking for help - is separate from his disability and/or the school's responsibilities.

It is a life lesson all on it's own, and I see no evidence of the OP dismissing that.

My only issue is with those who think life lessons of that sort mean something inherently bad: we are all capable of making mistakes, and we are all capable of learning from them.

And it is so so common for youngsters not to know how to turn to adults for help when overwhelmed/frightened/ashamed/embarrassed/panicky. I think our job, as adults, is to help them make better choices.

Again, what Elibean says.

how much time does he miss for medical appointments?
I think that might have a bearing on whether the school should carry any blame.
and does he have a statement?

or don't they have them in 6th form?

But if this lad is predicted AAB in his other subjects he's not exactly struggling to keep up is he? I think Sashh's argument is perfectly valid. Of course a disabled person has the right to ask for adjustments, but being allowed to cheat is not an adjustment.

Flame me now, but I think the OP is trying to play the disabled card.

(And I say this as a disabled person, with children who have required extra time etc in exams).

I don't think the OP is trying to play the disabled card, as she simply wanted to know what the penalties may be. Unfortunately everyone has latched onto the posts suggesting that it must be the school's fault and that this should be used to appeal against any penalty.

He's made a mistake which may force him to change his plans for the future, but at his age that's hardly an insurmountable problem. I'd be concentrating on coming up with a plan B rather than wasting time launching a campaign against the school. If anything, he needs their support more than ever now and antagonising them is hardly going to help him at this stage. I hope it all works out for him, OP.

I think the time of for medical appointents is a red herring really.Adults take A levels alongside working full time and bringing up families.
I would just let him take a slap on the wrist and move on.I think your son has been unlucky, lots of students do plagiarise and cheat and get away with it.
AS another poster said I would be very, very wary of bringing up his disability as the reason he cheated.I really don't think that it would be in his best interests at all.Iit would be in an admissions tutors mind that if his disability made him cheat once....