RCoA Delivered Examinations Examiner Regulations (FRCA and FFPMRCA)

6.1        Definition of Misconduct

Misconduct encompasses a range of inappropriate behaviours that violate the established Code of Conduct, undermine the integrity of the examination process, or fail to uphold the professional standards expected of examiners. Specific examples of misconduct include, but are not limited to: 

• Breach of Confidentiality: Unauthorised disclosure of examination content, candidate information, or any sensitive data related to the examination process.
• Dishonest Behaviour: This includes falsifying examination results, manipulating candidate scores, or any form of deceptive practices during the examination or in related administrative duties.
• Discrimination or Harassment: Engaging in discriminatory practices or harassment based on race, gender, age, religion, sexual orientation, or any other protected characteristic. This also covers bullying and any form of abusive behaviour towards candidates, staff, or fellow examiners.
• Conflict of Interest: Failing to disclose or appropriately manage conflicts of interest that could influence examination outcomes or examiner impartiality.
• Violation of Examination Policies: Intentionally violating standard examination protocols, rules, or guidelines, including the use of prohibited materials or aiding candidates in cheating.
• Substance Abuse: Being under the influence of alcohol or drugs while performing examination duties, which could impair judgment or professional conduct. 

6.2        Reporting Misconduct

Any allegations of misconduct by an examiner must be reported immediately. Reports can come from a variety of sources including candidates, other examiners, or staff. The initial report should be directed to the Director of Education, Training, and Examinations (ET&E) at the RCoA. This initiates the official record and ensures that the allegation is handled consistently with established procedures. 

6.3        Investigative Process

The RCoA upholds a detailed process for investigating allegations of misconduct (please see p. 18 of the downloadable PDF). 

This structured approach ensures that all allegations of misconduct are treated with the seriousness they deserve, following due process to protect the rights of all involved and maintain the integrity of the examination process. 

6.4        Possible Sanctions

Based on the findings from the investigations of either misconduct or underperformance, the following sanctions may be applied: 

• Written Warnings: For lesser offenses or initial instances of underperformance, written warnings may be issued, detailing the nature of the misconduct or underperformance and expectations for future behaviour.
• Retraining: Examiners may be required to undergo additional training to address specific deficiencies identified during the performance review or misconduct investigation.
• Suspension: Temporary suspension from examination duties may be imposed during the investigation or as a sanction, depending on the severity of the misconduct or the extent of underperformance.
• Removal from Examining Duties: In cases of severe misconduct or continued underperformance despite previous sanctions, examiners may be permanently removed from their roles.
• Other Disciplinary Actions: Additional sanctions may include demotion within examiner roles, exclusion from certain examining activities, or other disciplinary measures appropriate to the specific circumstances of the case. 

6.5        Communication of Outcomes

The outcomes of investigations or performance reviews, along with any imposed sanctions, will be communicated to the examiner in writing. This communication will: 

• Detail the decision, the reasons behind it, and any sanctions imposed.
• Specify any required actions the examiner must take, such as attending training sessions or meeting with a supervisor to discuss the outcomes. 

• Include information on how the examiner can appeal the decision if they wish to do so. 

   

6.6        Appeals Process

If an examiner wishes to appeal a decision related to misconduct or performance issues, the following procedure will be followed: 

Notification of Appeal: Examiners must notify the Director of Education, Training, and Examinations within a specified period, usually four weeks from the date they receive the decision. 

• Appeals Panel: The appeal will be heard by an Appeals Panel, which may include:
  • Vice Dean or Vice President as the chair.
  • Senior examiners not involved in the original investigation.
  • A lay representative to ensure impartiality.
  • The Director of ET&E may attend as an observer.
• Process: The examiner is allowed to present their case, and both written and verbal submissions can be made. The Appeals Panel will review all relevant documents and may call for additional evidence or testimonies if necessary.
• Decision: The Appeals Panel will deliberate and make a decision, which may uphold, overturn, or modify the original decision. This decision is final, and no further appeals are permitted within the RCoA.