Breaches of the Code of Ethics and Conduct
The SET Code of Ethics and Conduct sets out the professional behaviour and conduct expected of its members (in all grades). All members when joining and continuing their membership are required to commit to upholding and maintaining the obligations set out in the Code. The obligations are grouped under three key principles:
- Professional responsibility
- Professional behaviour
- Professional competency
If you believe that a SET member has acted outside of the Code, you may wish to raise this with us so that it can be considered under the Actions Against Members policy. Please contact membership@etfoundation.co.uk in the first instance with details of why you believe the Code may have been breached. Potential breaches of the Code of Ethics and Conduct may include but are not limited to:
- Professional misconduct
- Not upholding the reputation of the profession
- Not acting ethically, honestly and with integrity in the educational setting
SET members have a duty to notify SET if their suitability for continued membership is called into question as this may also need to also be considered under the Actions Against Members policy (for example, members who are subject to a disciplinary issue at their place of employment, which is upheld).
SET is committed to setting, maintaining and improving the standards of professionalism within the FE and Training sector. We will report regularly to our members on all alleged breaches of the Code which meet the threshold for referral to SET’s Investigation Panel.
In addition, members who are undertaking one of our Professional Formation programmes leading to either Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills status (QTLS) or Advanced Teacher Status (ATS) will also be bound by the relevant Terms and Conditions. A breach or suspected breach of these terms and conditions may lead to a full investigation if it is subsequently thought that the alleged action by the member has potentially breached the Code of Ethics and Conduct in force at the time.
Below, we have listed instances of breaches of the code for the current and previous membership year.
Breaches of the code (current membership year)Membership year 2022/2023
Reported breach: Suspected plagiarism and creation of a fictitious QTLS portfolio including: supplying false information about their QTLS mentor, falsifying documents, and suspected collusion with another QTLS participant
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory, actionable provision:
Professional Responsibility
- Clause (1) - Uphold the reputation of the profession – you must not act in a manner that is likely to undermine the public's faith and confidence in you and your profession.
And
Professional Behaviour
- Clause (1) - Act ethically, honestly and with integrity in the educational setting, without compromising or abusing your position.
- Clause (5) - Co-operate with any investigation in your capacity as a Further Education and Training professional and in accordance with the law.
Outcome: UPHELD
The Investigation Panel found that the Code had been breached in three areas – Professional Responsibility (clause 1), Professional Behaviour (clauses 1 and 5) as there was sufficient evidence to confirm that the information supplied about the mentor was false, that the individual has falsified documents and had colluded with another QTLS participant. The Panel also agreed that there had been a deliberate attempt to pass the work as their own authentic work.
Sanction: QTLS portfolio withdrawn, and the member was suspended from membership for 18 months.
There was an appeal received in this case, but the original decisions and sanctions were upheld.
Reported breach: Suspected creation of a fictitious QTLS portfolio including: supplying false information about their QTLS mentor, falsifying documents, and suspected collusion with another QTLS participant
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory, actionable provision:
Professional Responsibility
- Clause (1) - Uphold the reputation of the profession – you must not act in a manner that is likely to undermine the public's faith and confidence in you and your profession.
And
Professional Behaviour
- Clause (1) - Act ethically, honestly and with integrity in the educational setting, without compromising or abusing your position.
- Clause (5) - Co-operate with any investigation in your capacity as a Further Education and Training professional and in accordance with the law.
Outcome: UPHELD
The Investigation Panel found that the Code had been breached in three areas – Professional Responsibility (clause 1), Professional Behaviour (clauses 1 and 5) as there was sufficient evidence to confirm that the information supplied about the mentor was false, that the individual has falsified documents and had colluded with another QTLS participant.
Sanction: QTLS portfolio withdrawn, and the member was suspended from membership for 2 years.
There was an appeal received in this case, but the original decisions and sanctions were upheld.
Previous breaches of the codeMembership year 2021/2022
Reported breach: Suspected plagiarism within the member’s QTLS portfolio
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: Threshold not met to invoke the Action Against Members policy
The Investigation Panel agreed that some plagiarism had occurred (which breached the terms and conditions governing the Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) programme) but the misconduct was not severe enough to invoke the Action Against Members policy.
Sanction: Member was asked to resubmit evidence as part of their QTLS portfolio to ensure all work was authentic (in line with QTLS terms and conditions).
Reported breach: Suspected plagiarism within the member’s QTLS portfolio
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: Threshold not met to invoke the Action Against Members policy
The Investigation Panel agreed that some plagiarism had occurred (which breached the terms and conditions governing the Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) programme) but the misconduct was not severe enough to invoke the Action Against Members policy.
Sanction: Member was asked to resubmit evidence as part of their QTLS portfolio, to ensure all work was authentic (in line with QTLS terms and conditions).
Reported breach: Concerns over the authenticity of information provided within the QTLS portfolio
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: Threshold not met to invoke the Action Against Members policy
The Investigation Panel agreed that the discrepancies were caused by the supporter not the member.
Sanction: No action brought under the Action Against Members policy.
Reported breach: Suspected plagiarism and queries regarding the member’s eligibility to undertake QTLS
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: Threshold not met to invoke the Action Against Members policy The Investigation Panel agreed that some plagiarism had occurred (which breached the terms and conditions governing the Qualified Teacher Learning and Skills (QTLS) programme) but the misconduct was not severe enough to invoke the Action Against Member policy. The panel also found that the member did not meet the eligibility criteria to undertake QTLS.
Sanction: Member was asked to resubmit this part of their QTLS portfolio, to ensure all work was authentic (in line with QTLS terms and conditions). The member was invited to restart the QTLS programme once eligibility could be met.
Reported breach: Suspected discrepancies within the ATS portfolio regarding dates of documents
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: UPHELD
The Investigation Panel found that the clause (2) of the Code in force at the time had been breached and that the member had completed sections of their portfolio too early in the formal process and had dated the documents to appear as if they had been completed in line with the programme timeline.
Sanction: ATS portfolio withdrawn plus six months suspension from membership.
There was no appeal received in this case.
Reported breach: Suspected plagiarism within the QTLS portfolio
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: UPHELD
The Investigation Panel found that clause (2) of the Code in force at the time had been breached and the member had plagiarised significant extracts and failed to adequately reference the source used. The Panel found that there was a deliberate attempt to pass the work as their own authentic work.
Sanction: QTLS portfolio withdrawn, and the member was suspended from membership for 12 months.
There was no appeal received in this case.
Reported breach: Suspected use of fraudulent QTLS certificate
Relevant area of the code: Mandatory actionable provision clause (1) – Uphold the reputation of the profession, and (2) – act with honesty and integrity
Outcome: UPHELD
The Investigation panel found that clauses (1) and (2) of the Code in force at the time had been breached as there was sufficient evidence of the member using a counterfeit QTLS certificate in an attempt to deceive employers into believing the member had been awarded QTLS status.
Sanction: Member was suspended from membership for 12 months. In addition the panel instructed the membership team to notify the Teaching Regulation Agency.
There was an appeal received in this case, but the original decisions and sanctions were upheld.