a level coursework plagiarism

Programmes & Qualifications

• Order Microscope Slides
• Resource Plus
• Preventing plagiarism
• Internal moderation
• Resources to support mental health and wellbeing
• Special educational needs
• Tools to support remote teaching and learning
• Progression tests

Preventing plagiarism - guidance for teachers

What is your responsibility, how should candidates reference their sources, what are acceptable and unacceptable approaches to referencing.

• How to identify plagiarism in a candidate's work

How to prevent plagiarism through the teaching of your course

• How to identify the use of essay writing tools in a candidate's work

What to do if you suspect or discover plagiarism

Find out more.

As a teacher, you must make sure that the work submitted for examination or moderation is the candidate’s own work. Candidates must understand that they cannot submit someone else’s work as their own, or use material produced by someone else without citing and referencing it properly. A candidate taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as his or her own is an example of plagiarism.

It is your responsibility as a teacher to prevent plagiarism from happening and to detect it if it does happen. We need to be confident that the work we assess is the candidate's own before we can award a grade. You are responsible for the supervision of candidates when they are completing coursework and you are responsible for authenticating the candidates' work before you submit their marks for external moderation.

If you discover plagiarism in a candidate's work during the course, you may resolve the matter internally.

If you discover plagiarism in a candidate's work at the point of submission to us, you must not submit it. You should contact us if you are unsure whether to submit work or not.

Whether the information is in the form of a diagram, an image, a quotation or a passage, if it has come from another source this must be cited at the point it appears in the candidate’s work, and included in the bibliography or list of references section at the end of that work.

Candidates must clearly show:

• exactly where and how someone else’s work has been used within their own submission 
• whose work it is, and the source it came from.

When candidates use the work of others, they must ensure that they are not trying to present this work as though it is their own. In this guide we explain how sources should be referenced in candidates’ work.

You should encourage candidates to record details of each source they consult as they prepare their coursework. They should use either ‘single’ or “double” quotation marks accurately and consistently around the text quoted when recording material taken from sources. This will allow them to use these quotations accurately within their own work.

Please read the acceptable and unacceptable approaches to referencing (PDF, 103KB) guide.

What referencing system should be used?

Please check the syllabus document as we do sometimes specify a preferred system. If one is not specified in the syllabus, you may select the system to use. Whichever system you teach your candidates to use, it must be clear and consistent within the work and should include, at a minimum:

• the author(s), photographer or artist
• the date and place of publication (where stated)
• (for electronic resources) the URL and the date it was accessed, as the content may change over time.

When students are using videos from the internet, the following information should be included in the reference:

• the name of person posting video
• the title of film or programme
• the year video was posted
• the URL for the location of the video and the date it was accessed, as the content may change over time.

References for personal communications via conversation, phone, Skype, FaceTime, email, text message, letter or fax should include the following information:

• the sender/speaker/author
• the year of communication
• the medium of communication
• the receiver of communication
• the day/month of communication.

When a student is referencing leaflets or business cards, it may not be possible to include all of the information below, but the student should include as much information as possible. It may also be useful to include a copy of a leaflet in an appendix to the student’s work:

• the author (individual or corporate)
• the date (if available)
• the title (in italics)
• the date obtained.

Will the use of sources improve a candidate’s work?

Many types of coursework and creative work can and should use the work of others to influence their work, illustrate points, provide a contrast or explore ideas in further detail. The use of others’ work is also an important part of research and it is legitimate, provided that the source is appropriately cited and referenced so that the reader can see what it was and where it came from.

Different syllabuses and components will have different requirements for the content of the work, as they are assessing different things; however, if a candidate simply quotes others’ material at length without commentary or discussion, they are unlikely to achieve high marks. This is because it is not their own work, nor are they using it to explore their ideas.

How to identify plagiarism in a candidate’s work

As well as including others’ work without properly citing it, candidates may also commit deliberate misconduct by buying the work of others, usually online. Such attempts are often detected by antiplagiarism software after the work is submitted to us, but teachers also have a responsibility to verify that each submission is the work of the candidate. You can detect misconduct of this type by comparing the material presented for submission to work that is verifiably the candidate’s own (e.g. work produced in class).

Look out for obvious deviations in fluency or style from the candidate’s other work, and for substantial amounts of work produced which you have not seen in previous lessons. You may find that typing some of the suspected text into a search engine within “speech marks” helps to identify whether it comes from an existing website or not.

Some candidates attempting to pass off others’ work as their own use so-called ‘article spinners’. These are web-based tools that disguise copied material by replacing key words with their synonyms, producing material that is structurally identical to the original but features subtly different vocabulary. As demonstrated in the example below, the prose generated by ‘spinning’ can seem superficially impressive at a glance, but clearly lacks coherence when read attentively.

An example of text produced using a ‘spinning’ tool is provided below.

Source text from Wikipedia, ‘Learning’

Learning is the process of acquiring new or modifying existing knowledge, behaviours, skills, values, or preferences. The ability to learn is possessed by humans, animals, and some machines; there is also evidence for some kind of learning in some plants. Some learning is immediate, induced by a single event (e.g. being burned by a hot stove), but much skill and knowledge accumulates from repeated experiences. The changes induced by learning often last a lifetime, and it is hard to distinguish learned material that seems to be "lost" from that which cannot be retrieved. 1.

‘Spun’ text produced at Spinbot.com

Learning is the way toward procuring new or changing existing information, practices, abilities, qualities, or inclinations. The capacity to learn is controlled by people, creatures, and a few machines; there is additionally prove for some sort of learning in a few plants. Some learning is prompt, initiated by a solitary occasion (e.g. being singed by a hot stove), however much aptitude and learning amasses from rehashed encounters. The progressions actuated by adapting regularly endure forever, and it is difficult to recognize learned material that is by all accounts "lost" from that which can't be recovered. 2.

Look out for candidate work that displays unusually grand or overstated vocabulary (‘progressions actuated’), especially alongside awkward or faulty phrasing (‘there is additionally prove for’). 'Spun’ text of this type is still plagiarism. It is not acceptable in material submitted for assessment. You will already be familiar with your candidates’ usual standard of work, so be wary of any inconsistencies in their usual style and level of performance.

Topic selection

Depending on the type of component that you teach, you may have the opportunity to set the questions or the topics that candidates use as the basis for their coursework. If so, try to vary these from year to year, so that there is less opportunity for candidates to use material written by a candidate in a previous year. It may also be appropriate to encourage candidates to select their own topic and to relate their work to their own personal experience, or to specify that candidates use one or more source written in the last 12 months.

Check the progress and content of candidates’ work regularly

Where the rules of the syllabus allow it, you may find it helpful to see and check candidates’ work regularly, looking at the sources they are using at regular intervals. Encourage candidates to annotate their source material to make it clear how they are using it in their work.

Check candidates’ understanding of the material they have used

Asking candidates to explain verbally what they mean by a certain phrase or paragraph in their work is an effective way to check whether they understand what it is they have written. You could take this further by asking them to deliver a presentation about their coursework topic. You could also consider asking them to write a sentence or two about a source they have cited in their bibliography.

How to identify the use of essay writing tools in a candidate’s work

The use of essay writing tools cannot always be identified by plagiarism checkers, however, as a teacher, you should know your candidates’ style of writing and be able to tell when work produced is not a candidate’s usual style.

Here are some ways you check that the work is the candidate’s own:

• clear differences in style from the candidate’s other work
• substantial amounts of work produced which you have not seen in previous lessons
• significant differences in their final piece of work compared to previous drafts.
• Look for large sections of text or essays that include no referencing, and check references that are included to make sure they are accurate.
• Look for work or text that is not factually correct or repetitive, where this would be unusual for the candidate.
• Look out for work that does not express an opinion or personal perspective, where this would be unusual for the candidate.
• Where the rules of the syllabus allow it, you may find it helpful to see and check candidates’ work regularly and look at the sources they are using. Encourage candidates to annotate their source material to make it clear how they are using it in their work.
• Ask candidates to explain verbally what they mean by a certain phrase or paragraph in their work, this is an effective way to check whether they understand what they have written.

It is at your discretion to determine the authenticity of the candidate's work. If after following the advice outlined above, you have any doubt as to whether it is the candidate’s own work, you must not submit it to us. You should contact us if you are unsure about the authenticity of the candidate’s work and whether to submit it.

Please also see our statement on the use of generative AI in coursework .

Before you submit candidates' work to us, you must be satisfied the work is their own.

If you discover plagiarism in a candidate's work at the point of submission to us, you must not submit it.

If you discover plagiarism in a candidate's work after you have submitted it, you must report this to us using the Suspected candidate malpractice report: Exam day – 9c (PDF, 614KB) form.

For further information, please see the Cambridge Handbook:

• 3.2.1 Authenticating coursework
• 3.3.1 Authenticating examined coursework

You should email us if you are unsure on the authenticity of the candidate’s work and whether to submit it.

You can find further information on preventing and identifying plagiarism in the University of Cambridge referencing guidance

1. 'Learning' from the English Wikipedia (accessed 5 July 2018) 2. Generated using Spinbot (accessed 5 July 2018)

• Syllabus overview
• Past papers, examiner reports and specimen papers
• Published resources

Information about what plagiarism is, and how you can avoid it.

The University defines plagiarism as follows:

“Presenting work or ideas from another source as your own, with or without consent of the original author, by incorporating it into your work without full acknowledgement. All published and unpublished material, whether in manuscript, printed or electronic form, is covered under this definition, as is the use of material generated wholly or in part through use of artificial intelligence (save when use of AI for assessment has received prior authorisation e.g. as a reasonable adjustment for a student’s disability). Plagiarism can also include re-using your own work without citation. Under the regulations for examinations, intentional or reckless plagiarism is a disciplinary offence.”

The necessity to acknowledge others’ work or ideas applies not only to text, but also to other media, such as computer code, illustrations, graphs etc. It applies equally to published text and data drawn from books and journals, and to unpublished text and data, whether from lectures, theses or other students’ essays. You must also attribute text, data, or other resources downloaded from websites.

Please note that artificial intelligence (AI) can only be used within assessments where specific prior authorisation has been given, or when technology that uses AI has been agreed as reasonable adjustment for a student’s disability (such as voice recognition software for transcriptions, or spelling and grammar checkers).

The best way of avoiding plagiarism is to learn and employ the principles of good academic practice from the beginning of your university career. Avoiding plagiarism is not simply a matter of making sure your references are all correct, or changing enough words so the examiner will not notice your paraphrase; it is about deploying your academic skills to make your work as good as it can be.

Students will benefit from taking an  online course  which has been developed to provide a useful overview of the issues surrounding plagiarism and practical ways to avoid it.

Forms of plagiarism

Verbatim (word for word) quotation without clear acknowledgement Quotations must always be identified as such by the use of either quotation marks or indentation, and with full referencing of the sources cited. It must always be apparent to the reader which parts are your own independent work and where you have drawn on ideas and language from another source.

Cutting and pasting from the Internet without clear acknowledgement Information derived from the Internet must be adequately referenced and included in the bibliography. It is important to evaluate carefully all material found on the Internet, as it is less likely to have been through the same process of scholarly peer review as published sources.

Paraphrasing Paraphrasing the work of others by altering a few words and changing their order, or by closely following the structure of their argument, is plagiarism if you do not give due acknowledgement to the author whose work you are using.

A passing reference to the original author in your own text may not be enough; you must ensure that you do not create the misleading impression that the paraphrased wording or the sequence of ideas are entirely your own. It is better to write a brief summary of the author’s overall argument in your own words, indicating that you are doing so, than to paraphrase particular sections of his or her writing. This will ensure you have a genuine grasp of the argument and will avoid the difficulty of paraphrasing without plagiarising. You must also properly attribute all material you derive from lectures.

Collusion This can involve unauthorised collaboration between students, failure to attribute assistance received, or failure to follow precisely regulations on group work projects. It is your responsibility to ensure that you are entirely clear about the extent of collaboration permitted, and which parts of the work must be your own.

Inaccurate citation It is important to cite correctly, according to the conventions of your discipline. As well as listing your sources (i.e. in a bibliography), you must indicate, using a footnote or an in-text reference, where a quoted passage comes from. Additionally, you should not include anything in your references or bibliography that you have not actually consulted. If you cannot gain access to a primary source you must make it clear in your citation that your knowledge of the work has been derived from a secondary text (for example, Bradshaw, D. Title of Book, discussed in Wilson, E., Title of Book (London, 2004), p. 189).

Failure to acknowledge assistance You must clearly acknowledge all assistance which has contributed to the production of your work, such as advice from fellow students, laboratory technicians, and other external sources. This need not apply to the assistance provided by your tutor or supervisor, or to ordinary proofreading, but it is necessary to acknowledge other guidance which leads to substantive changes of content or approach.

Use of material written by professional agencies or other persons You should neither make use of professional agencies in the production of your work nor submit material which has been written for you even with the consent of the person who has written it. It is vital to your intellectual training and development that you should undertake the research process unaided. Under Statute XI on University Discipline, all members of the University are prohibited from providing material that could be submitted in an examination by students at this University or elsewhere.

Auto-plagiarism You must not submit work for assessment that you have already submitted (partially or in full), either for your current course or for another qualification of this, or any other, university, unless this is specifically provided for in the special regulations for your course. Where earlier work by you is citable, ie. it has already been published, you must reference it clearly. Identical pieces of work submitted concurrently will also be considered to be auto-plagiarism.

Why does plagiarism matter?

Plagiarism is a breach of academic integrity. It is a principle of intellectual honesty that all members of the academic community should acknowledge their debt to the originators of the ideas, words, and data which form the basis for their own work. Passing off another’s work as your own is not only poor scholarship, but also means that you have failed to complete the learning process. Plagiarism is unethical and can have serious consequences for your future career; it also undermines the standards of your institution and of the degrees it issues.

Why should you avoid plagiarism?

There are many reasons to avoid plagiarism. You have come to university to learn to know and speak your own mind, not merely to reproduce the opinions of others - at least not without attribution. At first it may seem very difficult to develop your own views, and you will probably find yourself paraphrasing the writings of others as you attempt to understand and assimilate their arguments. However it is important that you learn to develop your own voice. You are not necessarily expected to become an original thinker, but you are expected to be an independent one - by learning to assess critically the work of others, weigh up differing arguments and draw your own conclusions. Students who plagiarise undermine the ethos of academic scholarship while avoiding an essential part of the learning process.

You should avoid plagiarism because you aspire to produce work of the highest quality. Once you have grasped the principles of source use and citation, you should find it relatively straightforward to steer clear of plagiarism. Moreover, you will reap the additional benefits of improvements to both the lucidity and quality of your writing. It is important to appreciate that mastery of the techniques of academic writing is not merely a practical skill, but one that lends both credibility and authority to your work, and demonstrates your commitment to the principle of intellectual honesty in scholarship.

What happens if you are thought to have plagiarised?

The University regards plagiarism in examinations as a serious matter. Cases will be investigated and penalties may range from deduction of marks to expulsion from the University, depending on the seriousness of the occurrence. Even if plagiarism is inadvertent, it can result in a penalty. The forms of plagiarism listed above are all potentially disciplinary offences in the context of formal assessment requirements.

The regulations regarding conduct in examinations apply equally to the ‘submission and assessment of a thesis, dissertation, essay, or other coursework not undertaken in formal examination conditions but which counts towards or constitutes the work for a degree or other academic award’. Additionally, this includes the transfer and confirmation of status exercises undertaken by graduate students. Cases of suspected plagiarism in assessed work are investigated under the disciplinary regulations concerning conduct in examinations. Intentional plagiarism in this context means that you understood that you were breaching the regulations and did so intending to gain advantage in the examination. Reckless, in this context, means that you understood or could be expected to have understood (even if you did not specifically consider it) that your work might breach the regulations, but you took no action to avoid doing so. Intentional or reckless plagiarism may incur severe penalties, including failure of your degree or expulsion from the university.

If plagiarism is suspected in a piece of work submitted for assessment in an examination, the matter will be referred to the Proctors. They will thoroughly investigate the claim and call the student concerned for interview. If at this point there is no evidence of a breach of the regulations, no further disciplinary action will be taken although there may still be an academic penalty. However, if it is concluded that a breach of the regulations may have occurred, the Proctors will refer the case to the Student Disciplinary Panel.

If you are suspected of plagiarism your College Secretary/Academic Administrator and subject tutor will support you through the process and arrange for a member of Congregation to accompany you to all hearings. They will be able to advise you what to expect during the investigation and how best to make your case. The OUSU Student Advice Service can also provide useful information and support. 

Does this mean that I shouldn’t use the work of other authors?

On the contrary, it is vital that you situate your writing within the intellectual debates of your discipline. Academic essays almost always involve the use and discussion of material written by others, and, with due acknowledgement and proper referencing, this is clearly distinguishable from plagiarism. The knowledge in your discipline has developed cumulatively as a result of years of research, innovation and debate. You need to give credit to the authors of the ideas and observations you cite. Not only does this accord recognition to their work, it also helps you to strengthen your argument by making clear the basis on which you make it. Moreover, good citation practice gives your reader the opportunity to follow up your references, or check the validity of your interpretation.

Does every statement in my essay have to be backed up with references?

You may feel that including the citation for every point you make will interrupt the flow of your essay and make it look very unoriginal. At least initially, this may sometimes be inevitable. However, by employing good citation practice from the start, you will learn to avoid errors such as close paraphrasing or inadequately referenced quotation. It is important to understand the reasons behind the need for transparency of source use.

All academic texts, even student essays, are multi-voiced, which means they are filled with references to other texts. Rather than attempting to synthesise these voices into one narrative account, you should make it clear whose interpretation or argument you are employing at any one time - whose ‘voice’ is speaking.

If you are substantially indebted to a particular argument in the formulation of your own, you should make this clear both in footnotes and in the body of your text according to the agreed conventions of the discipline, before going on to describe how your own views develop or diverge from this influence.

On the other hand, it is not necessary to give references for facts that are common knowledge in your discipline. If you are unsure as to whether something is considered to be common knowledge or not, it is safer to cite it anyway and seek clarification. You do need to document facts that are not generally known and ideas that are interpretations of facts. 

Does this only matter in exams?

Although plagiarism in weekly essays does not constitute a University disciplinary offence, it may well lead to College disciplinary measures. Persistent academic under-performance can even result in your being sent down from the University. Although tutorial essays traditionally do not require the full scholarly apparatus of footnotes and referencing, it is still necessary to acknowledge your sources and demonstrate the development of your argument, usually by an in-text reference. Many tutors will ask that you do employ a formal citation style early on, and you will find that this is good preparation for later project and dissertation work. In any case, your work will benefit considerably if you adopt good scholarly habits from the start, together with the techniques of critical thinking and writing described above.

As junior members of the academic community, students need to learn how to read academic literature and how to write in a style appropriate to their discipline. This does not mean that you must become masters of jargon and obfuscation; however the process is akin to learning a new language. It is necessary not only to learn new terminology, but the practical study skills and other techniques which will help you to learn effectively.

Developing these skills throughout your time at university will not only help you to produce better coursework, dissertations, projects and exam papers, but will lay the intellectual foundations for your future career. Even if you have no intention of becoming an academic, being able to analyse evidence, exercise critical judgement, and write clearly and persuasively are skills that will serve you for life, and which any employer will value.

Borrowing essays from other students to adapt and submit as your own is plagiarism, and will develop none of these necessary skills, holding back your academic development. Students who lend essays for this purpose are doing their peers no favours.

Unintentional plagiarism

Not all cases of plagiarism arise from a deliberate intention to cheat. Sometimes students may omit to take down citation details when taking notes, or they may be genuinely ignorant of referencing conventions. However, these excuses offer no sure protection against a charge of plagiarism. Even in cases where the plagiarism is found to have been neither intentional nor reckless, there may still be an academic penalty for poor practice.

It is your responsibility to find out the prevailing referencing conventions in your discipline, to take adequate notes, and to avoid close paraphrasing. If you are offered induction sessions on plagiarism and study skills, you should attend. Together with the advice contained in your subject handbook, these will help you learn how to avoid common errors. If you are undertaking a project or dissertation you should ensure that you have information on plagiarism and collusion. If ever in doubt about referencing, paraphrasing or plagiarism, you have only to ask your tutor.

Examples of plagiarism

There are some helpful examples of plagiarism-by-paraphrase and you will also find extensive advice on the referencing and library skills pages.

The following examples demonstrate some of the common pitfalls to avoid. These examples use the referencing system prescribed by the History Faculty but should be of use to students of all disciplines.

Source text

From a class perspective this put them [highwaymen] in an ambivalent position. In aspiring to that proud, if temporary, status of ‘Gentleman of the Road’, they did not question the inegalitarian hierarchy of their society. Yet their boldness of act and deed, in putting them outside the law as rebellious fugitives, revivified the ‘animal spirits’ of capitalism and became an essential part of the oppositional culture of working-class London, a serious obstacle to the formation of a tractable, obedient labour force. Therefore, it was not enough to hang them – the values they espoused or represented had to be challenged.

(Linebaugh, P., The London Hanged: Crime and Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1991), p. 213. [You should give the reference in full the first time you use it in a footnote; thereafter it is acceptable to use an abbreviated version, e.g. Linebaugh, The London Hanged, p. 213.]

Plagiarised

• Although they did not question the inegalitarian hierarchy of their society, highwaymen became an essential part of the oppositional culture of working-class London, posing a serious threat to the formation of a biddable labour force. (This is a patchwork of phrases copied verbatim from the source, with just a few words changed here and there. There is no reference to the original author and no indication that these words are not the writer’s own.)
• Although they did not question the inegalitarian hierarchy of their society, highwaymen exercised a powerful attraction for the working classes. Some historians believe that this hindered the development of a submissive workforce. (This is a mixture of verbatim copying and acceptable paraphrase. Although only one phrase has been copied from the source, this would still count as plagiarism. The idea expressed in the first sentence has not been attributed at all, and the reference to ‘some historians’ in the second is insufficient. The writer should use clear referencing to acknowledge all ideas taken from other people’s work.)
• Although they did not question the inegalitarian hierarchy of their society, highwaymen ‘became an essential part of the oppositional culture of working-class London [and] a serious obstacle to the formation of a tractable, obedient labour force’.1 (This contains a mixture of attributed and unattributed quotation, which suggests to the reader that the first line is original to this writer. All quoted material must be enclosed in quotation marks and adequately referenced.)
• Highwaymen’s bold deeds ‘revivified the “animal spirits” of capitalism’ and made them an essential part of the oppositional culture of working-class London.1 Peter Linebaugh argues that they posed a major obstacle to the formation of an obedient labour force. (Although the most striking phrase has been placed within quotation marks and correctly referenced, and the original author is referred to in the text, there has been a great deal of unacknowledged borrowing. This should have been put into the writer’s own words instead.)
• By aspiring to the title of ‘Gentleman of the Road’, highwaymen did not challenge the unfair taxonomy of their society. Yet their daring exploits made them into outlaws and inspired the antagonistic culture of labouring London, forming a grave impediment to the development of a submissive workforce. Ultimately, hanging them was insufficient – the ideals they personified had to be discredited.1 (This may seem acceptable on a superficial level, but by imitating exactly the structure of the original passage and using synonyms for almost every word, the writer has paraphrased too closely. The reference to the original author does not make it clear how extensive the borrowing has been. Instead, the writer should try to express the argument in his or her own words, rather than relying on a ‘translation’ of the original.)

Non-plagiarised

• Peter Linebaugh argues that although highwaymen posed no overt challenge to social orthodoxy – they aspired to be known as ‘Gentlemen of the Road’ – they were often seen as anti-hero role models by the unruly working classes. He concludes that they were executed not only for their criminal acts, but in order to stamp out the threat of insubordinacy.1 (This paraphrase of the passage is acceptable as the wording and structure demonstrate the reader’s interpretation of the passage and do not follow the original too closely. The source of the ideas under discussion has been properly attributed in both textual and footnote references.)
• Peter Linebaugh argues that highwaymen represented a powerful challenge to the mores of capitalist society and inspired the rebelliousness of London’s working class.1 (This is a brief summary of the argument with appropriate attribution.) 1 Linebaugh, P., The London Hanged: Crime and Civil Society in the Eighteenth Century (London, 1991), p. 213.

Systems & Services

Access Student Self Service

• Student Self Service
• Self Service guide
• Registration guide
• Libraries search
• OXCORT - see TMS
• GSS - see Student Self Service
• The Careers Service
• Oxford University Sport
• Online store
• Gardens, Libraries and Museums
• Researchers Skills Toolkit
• LinkedIn Learning (formerly Lynda.com)
• Access Guide
• Lecture Lists
• Exam Papers (OXAM)
• Oxford Talks

Latest student news

CAN'T FIND WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR?

Try our extensive database of FAQs or submit your own question...

Ask a question

• Current Students
• News & Press
• Exam Technique for In-Person Exams
• Revising for 24 Hour Take Home Exams
• Introduction to 24 Hour Take Home Exams
• Before the 24 Hour Take Home Exam
• Exam Technique for 24 Hour Take Home Exams
• Structuring a Literature Review
• Writing Coursework under Time Constraints
• Reflective Writing
• Writing a Synopsis
• Structuring a Science Report
• Presentations
• How the University works out your degree award
• Personal Extenuating Circumstances (PEC)
• Accessing your assignment feedback via Canvas
• Inspera Digital Exams
• Writing Introductions and Conclusions
• Paragraphing
• Reporting Verbs
• Signposting
• Proofreading
• Working with a Proofreader
• Writing Concisely
• The 1-Hour Writing Challenge
• Editing strategies
• Apostrophes
• Semi-colons
• Run-on sentences
• How to Improve your Grammar (native English)
• How to Improve your Grammar (non-native English)
• Independent Learning for Online Study
• Reflective Practice
• Academic Reading
• Strategic Reading Framework
• Note-taking Strategies
• Note-taking in Lectures
• Making Notes from Reading
• Using Evidence to Support your Argument
• Integrating Scholarship
• Managing Time and Motivation
• Dealing with Procrastination
• How to Paraphrase
• Quote or Paraphrase?
• How to Quote

Referencing

• Artificial Intelligence and Academic Integrity
• Use and limitations of generative AI
• Acknowledging use of AI
• Numeracy, Maths & Statistics
• Library Search
• Search Techniques
• Keeping up to date
• Evaluating Information
• Managing Information
• Thinking Critically about AI
• Using Information generated by AI
• Digital Capabilities
• SensusAccess
• Develop Your Digital Skills
• Digital Tools to Help You Study

Guidance on understanding plagiarism and how to improve your academic writing to ensure good academic practice.

• Newcastle University
• Academic Skills Kit
• Good Academic Practice

What is plagiarism?

Plagiarism at Newcastle University is defined as:

the use of ideas or works from another source, presented as your own, without specific acknowledgement

This covers all types of work, for example: ideas, words, data, designs, images, music and computer code, and may also involve the use of electronic materials and the use of material generated through use of artificial intelligence.

The University takes plagiarism and academic misconduct seriously and has clear  academic misconduct procedures in place.

While plagiarism can be intentional, often it is unintentionally caused by poor academic writing, inaccurate notetaking or incorrect referencing.

Sorry, you need JavaScript to view this video

What does plagiarism look like?

While the definition of plagiarism may seem quite simple, it can take a number of different forms:

Direct (verbatim) copying

This form of plagiarism occurs when someone copies a section of work word for word without clear and full acknowledgement of the source . In some subjects, using direct quotes to illustrate an argument or analysis is standard practice. However, all direct quotations must be written in quotation marks and require an accurate reference . A reference is also needed if you directly copy or reuse an image, piece of music, data or computer code that was produced originally by someone else.

Paraphrasing

If you paraphrase the work of others without clear and full acknowledgement of the source, this is plagiarism . This may take the form of copying a section of another person’s work and changing one or two words or phrases without providing a reference to the original work, or patching together pieces of work by different authors to form a paragraph, without acknowledging any of the sources. Summarising the work of another is acceptable practice, but the source must be acknowledged.

Custom Essay Writing

Acquiring work produced by someone else and submitting it as your own demonstrates a lack of academic integrity and is a form of plagiarism . Whether copied from a friend, produced by a family member or paid for using a custom essay writing service, if the work you submit is not your own effort, it is plagiarism . Even if a piece of work is original, unless you created it, this would be an attempt to pass off the work of someone else as your own.

Working with other students to produce a piece of work that you submit for individual assessment (unless group work is clearly stipulated in the assessment criteria) is a form of plagiarism known as collusion . This can happen in take home exams or for assignment submissions. Collusion can include allowing another student to copy your assessed work or providing opportunity for them to do so. Some levels of proof reading may also be considered collusion.

Self (auto) plagiarism

This takes the form of submitting the same work for more than one assignment, whether for two modules at Newcastle, or re-using work you've submitted at another university as part of a different degree . Where you submit the whole or part of the same piece of work for different assessments, you are receiving credit for the same piece of intellectual work, a practice known as “double counting.” This is not the same as self-citation, where you reference yourself in a previously published or submitted piece of work in the process of creating something new . This is good academic practice, and is more commonly found in postgraduate work, where candidates may want to develop an idea or interest from their undergraduate or taught postgraduate dissertations, or later in their career where they may have amassed a body of work on a specific research field.

Artificial Intelligence and Your Learning

Guidance to help you responsibly and openly engage with Artificial Intelligence for your studies.

How do you avoid plagiarism?

These are some key ways in which you can avoid plagiarism:

• Acknowledge all the sources of information you use in your work by providing accurate in-text citations and complete references. Explore the range of tools available to help you write and manage your references on our Referencing page.
• Follow the referencing style recommended by your School. Familiarise yourself with the rules of your referencing style so that you can spot mistakes or referencing omissions in your writing.
• Think about the best way to integrate what you have read into your writing. Look at our guides to paraphrasing and quoting below to find out how to effectively structure your writing in line with good academic practice.
• Take accurate notes when reading and researching. Keeping an accurate record of where you’ve found ideas and when you've copied direct quotations can help you avoid accidental plagiarism. Our Reading and Note-taking and Managing Information pages provide lots of advice on managing your research.
• Do not fabricate or falsify data. Honesty is a key part of academic integrity, and accuracy in your work demonstrates good academic practice.
• Never give or receive unauthorised help with academic work. If you’re asking someone to check your work, look at our advice for Working with a Proofreader to make sure the work remains your own.
• Only hand in work that you have done yourself. Work submitted should be created by you.
• Do not submit work that you have already submitted for another assignment, whether the work was submitted at Newcastle University or another institution. If appropriate, use self-citation to highlight previous work that is relevant to your current assessment.

How to paraphrase

Learn how to express the source you’re reading in your own words to highlight your learning.

Quote or paraphrase?

Quote the original words of your source, or paraphrase them in your own words? Read our advice on deciding which will work best for your purpose.

How to quote

Find out how to integrate quotations purposefully and smoothly into your writing.

Cite Them Right tutorial

Log in to Cite Them Right to access their referencing and plagiarism tutorial.

Find out how to accurately acknowledge the sources of information you use in your work.

Managing information

Explore ways to manage the information you find so that you can use it efficiently, ethically and with academic integrity.

Online resources

Plagiarism quiz

Put your knowledge to the test in our referencing quiz. **Online quiz**

Academic Skills Team

For more guidance on your learning, book a one-to-one tutorial with one of our tutors or visit our website for more activities and resources.

Search Engage

What happens in cases of plagiarism, fabricated/fraudulent coursework or malpractice.

The procedure for cases of plagiarism, malpractice or fabricated/fraudulent coursework are explained in the steps below: 

1. You will receive a letter from your department asking you to come to a departmental meeting. The letter will include: 

• the date of your meeting (you should be given 3 days notice)
• what the allegation is (whether plagiarism, malpractice or fabricated/fraudulent coursework)
• which piece(s) of work the allegation is about 
• a copy of the work fully marked-up (i.e. the sections that are believed to be plagiarised will be highlighted, underlined or clearly indicated)
• a copy of the evidence related to the allegation (i.e. the book/website/other essay etc that they think that you have plagiarised)

2. At the departmental meeting, you will have a chance to talk about the allegations and put forward your version of the events. If you have any special circumstances relating to the case, you should make these clear here. You can bring a Supporter with you who can be anyone not directly linked to the case (family, friend, colleague).

LUU Advice can help you prepare for the meeting, for more information see the related articles below. 

The Head of School or a senior member of staff acting on their behalf will normally chair the meeting. Your personal tutor, module leader and other relevant department members who have been involved in the module may also be present. There may also be a staff member to take minutes. 

3. After the meeting, you will be told what will happen. There are 14 days for your outcome, any of the following three options:

• The School can decide that you are innocent of the allegation. Nothing else will have to happen. 
• If you have admitted to the offence and it is your first offence, the case may be settled at School level. The School will let you know what penalty has been decided on. A copy of this letter will be sent to the Student Cases Team to be put on your file but you will not have to go to anymore meetings. Once the penalty (often a re-submission of work) has been completed, the procedure is at an end for you.
• If you have denied the allegation but the School believe that there is a case to answer, or if the allegation relates to a serious offence (whether or not you have admitted to it), or if it is a second or subsequent offence they will refer your case to the University Committee on Applications. They may recommend a penalty. 

If you don’t attend your departmental meeting without good cause (such as illness) the School can assume that you admit to the allegation. They can then award a penalty and/or forward the case to the University.

For more information, check out the University’s pages on procedures and policies for cases of plagiarism, fabricated/ fraudulent coursework and malpractice. 

This website works best with JavaScript switched on. Please enable JavaScript

• Centre Services
• Associate Extranet
• All About Maths

AS and A-level History

• Specification
• Planning resources
• Teaching resources
• Assessment resources

Introduction

• Specification at a glance
• 1A The Age of the Crusades, c1071–1204
• 1B Spain in the Age of Discovery, 1469–1598 (A-level only)
• 1C The Tudors: England, 1485–1603
• 1D Stuart Britain and the Crisis of Monarchy, 1603–1702
• 1E Russia in the Age of Absolutism and Enlightenment, 1682–1796 (A-level only)
• 1F Industrialisation and the people: Britain, c1783–1885
• 1G Challenge and transformation: Britain, c1851–1964
• 1H Tsarist and Communist Russia, 1855–1964
• 1J The British Empire, c1857–1967
• 1K The making of a Superpower: USA, 1865–1975
• 1L The quest for political stability: Germany, 1871–1991
• 2A Royal Authority and the Angevin Kings, 1154–1216
• 2B The Wars of the Roses, 1450–1499
• 2C The Reformation in Europe, c1500–1564 (A-level only)
• 2D Religious conflict and the Church in England, c1529–c1570
• 2E The English Revolution, 1625–1660
• 2F The Sun King: Louis XIV, France and Europe, 1643–1715 (A-level only)
• 2G The Birth of the USA, 1760–1801
• 2H France in Revolution, 1774–1815 (A-level only)
• 2J America: A Nation Divided, c1845–1877
• 2K International Relations and Global Conflict, c1890–1941 (A-level only)
• 2L Italy and Fascism, c1900–1945
• 2M Wars and Welfare: Britain in Transition, 1906–1957
• 2N Revolution and dictatorship: Russia, 1917–1953
• 2O Democracy and Nazism: Germany, 1918–1945
• 2P The Transformation of China, 1936–1997
• 2Q The American Dream: reality and illusion, 1945–1980
• 2R The Cold War, c1945–1991
• 2S The Making of Modern Britain, 1951–2007
• 2T The Crisis of Communism: The USSR and the Soviet Empire, 1953–2000 (A-level only)

Component 3: Historical investigation (non-exam assessment) (A-level only)

• Scheme of assessment
• Non-exam assessment administration
• General administration

Purpose of the Historical investigation

The purpose of the Historical Investigation is to enable students to develop the skills, knowledge and historical understanding acquired through the study of the examined components of the specification.

Through undertaking the Historical Investigation students will develop an enhanced understanding of the nature and purpose of history as a discipline and how historians work.

• ask relevant and significant questions about the past and undertake research
• develop as independent learners and critical and reflective thinkers
• acquire an understanding of the nature of historical study
• organise and communicate their knowledge and understanding in a piece of sustained writing

Students will be required to submit a Historical Investigation based on a development or issue which has been subject to different historical interpretations. The Historical Investigation must:

• be independently researched and written by the student
• be presented in the form of a piece of extended writing of between 3500 and 4500 words in length, with a limit of 4500 words
• draw upon the student's investigation of sources (both primary and secondary) which relate to the development or issue chosen and the differing interpretations that have been placed on this
• place the issue to be investigated within a context of approximately 100 years
• be an issue which does not duplicate the content of Components 1 and 2.

The Historical Investigation must be supervised in accordance with the requirements of Section 5.1 of this specification.

The centre must complete a non-examined assessment (NEA) title approval form no later than 20 October in the year before the intended completion of the A-level course. The form must detail the title and date range of the proposed historical investigation for each student. The teacher must state which examined components will be studied. This form must be submitted to AQA for review. AQA will check that the proposed historical investigation title, when combined with the examined components, meets the following requirements:

• the proposed title is set in the context of approximately 100 years
• there is no overlap with the content of the options studied for the examined components
• all three components together cover a chronological range of at least 200 years

AQA will inform the centre if any historical investigation title does not meet the requirements and the focus for the non-examined assessment will need to be changed.

Failure to comply with these requirements will invalidate the student’s entry and no A-level result will be issued.

It is therefore vital that the teacher ensures that all requirements are met. If a student changes their historical investigation title, a new form should be completed.

On completion of the NEA, each student must also complete a Candidate Record Form (CRF) detailing the options studied for the examined components. The student must sign this form. The teacher must counter sign the CRF and this declaration will confirm that the historical investigation complies with the NEA title approval form and has adhered to all requirements.

The CRF must be sent to the moderator at the same time as marks for the NEA are submitted. The moderator will check that all course requirements have been met.

If the requirements have not been met, then the entry will be invalid and no result issued.

Copies of all the documentation, including the NEA proposal form and guidance on submission procedures are available from the AQA website at www.aqa.org.uk/history

Further guidance is available from the History subject team: [email protected]

Choice of issue and question to be studied

Students will be required to identify an issue or topic they wish to study and develop a question from this issue or topic as the focus of the Historical Investigation. The issue or topic to be studied and the question which stems from it must place the issue or topic in the context of approximately 100 years of history. The question could be based on British history or non-British history or could be a multi-country issue. However, it must not duplicate content studied in Components 1 and 2.

The Historical Investigation could identify an issue and a related question which traces a development over approximately 100 years. Alternatively, it could focus on a narrower issue, but place it the context of approximately 100 years.

• A broad issue and related question which analyses its development over approximately 100 years, for example: assessing how Puritanism changed during the Seventeenth Century; or assessing the extent to which the condition of the Russian peasant improved over the period 1850–1950
• A more specific issue in the context of approximately 100 years, for example: assessing the extent to which the Glorious Revolution successfully settled relations between Crown and Parliament in the context of the Stuart period; or assessing the extent to which Tsar Nicholas I changed the nature of Tsarist rule set against the period of Catherine the Great, Alexander and Nicholas I.

Issues which relate to international, national or local developments are appropriate, as are investigations which adopt specific historical perspectives such as cultural, social or technological.

However, in choosing the issue, students need to take the following into account:

• Is there a range of primary sources and primary material available to support individual investigation?
• Is the issue and related question one which has promoted debate and differences of interpretation amongst historians?

When framing the question to be answered, students must ensure that it enables them to demonstrate skills of historical analysis, evaluation and judgement, to appraise the views of historians and to evaluate primary sources.

Students are advised to use the type of question formulations seen in examinations such as the use of questions which begin ‘To what extent’ or a quotation in the form of a judgement followed by ‘Assess the validity of this view’.

The A-level subject content for history requires that students carry out a Historical Investigation that is independently researched. It is acceptable that students within a centre base their Historical Investigations around the same topic. However, the essential pre-requisite of non-exam assessment and the principal purpose of the Historical Investigation both require that the Historical Investigation is the work of individual students each developing a question to investigate and each evaluating individually, primary sources and historical interpretations. Where students in a centre are studying a similar topic or topics, there may be only a limited number of primary sources and, more so, a limited number of historical interpretations. However, the centre must ensure that students assess and evaluate sources individually, even where sources used are similar. It is not permitted for centres to direct students to the same sources as this fundamentally undermines the need for the Historical Investigation to be the work of an individual student.

Further guidance and exemplar material are available via the AQA website.

The skills and qualities to be demonstrated and assessed

The skills and qualities of all three Assessment Objectives must be demonstrated in the Historical Investigation. These are:

AO1: demonstrate, organise and communicate knowledge and understanding to analyse and evaluate the key features related to the periods studied, making substantiated judgements and exploring concepts, as relevant, of cause, consequence, change, continuity, similarity, difference and significance.

AO2: analyse and evaluate appropriate source material, primary and/or contemporary to the period, within the historical context.

AO3: analyse and evaluate, in relation to the historical context, different ways in which aspects of the past have been interpreted.

The task required of students in responding to AO3 will be different from that in the examined components in that students will be expected to:

• show an understanding of the limitations placed on historians
• show an understanding of the significance of the time and/or context in which an historian writes
• compare and evaluate differing historical interpretations.

Students must base their analysis and evaluation of historical interpretations on the work of academic historians. It is not acceptable that the analysis and evaluation is based on textbook historians or course books.

Students are expected to use short quotations, paraphrase and/or footnotes to show the source of their interpretations. Lengthy extracts are not required.

In developing their response to a chosen issue to investigate, students are expected to consult a range of resources, which may include textbooks, course books and work of academic historians. Within the Historical Investigation, however, there must be explicit analysis and evaluation of two differing interpretations by academic historians where students analyse and evaluate the differences between the interpretations, show an awareness of the time and/or context of the interpretations and demonstrate an understanding of the limitations placed on historians.

The Historical Investigation must be written with the qualities of all three objectives integrated within the body of the work. For example, students will analyse, evaluate and reach judgements about the question chosen (AO1) and within this analysis and evaluation, appraise the views of historians (AO3) and analyse and evaluate primary source material and the extent to which it is useful in supporting arguments or conclusions (AO2).

Completion of the Historical investigation

The Investigation should be completed in approximately 3500-4500 words, excluding bibliography, footnotes, and appendices, with a limit of 4500 words. Work that exceeds this word limit will incur a five mark penalty. This penalty will be applied by AQA, and should not be applied by the teacher. A word count must be included on the Candidate Record Form.

The Investigation must contain an evaluation of three primary sources. At least two different types of primary source should be evaluated. These may be different types of written primary sources, for example: official publications; reports; diaries; speeches; letters; chronicles; observations of elite or ‘ordinary’ people (from the inside or from the outside). Other appropriate sources may include artefacts, archaeological or visual sources.

The Investigation must also demonstrate an understanding of differing interpretations presented by two academic historians about the issue.

Students are advised to avoid extensive, verbatim copying from sources and to ensure that the Investigation is written in their own words. Extensive verbatim copying can lead to malpractice.

The use of footnotes is strongly advised in order to demonstrate the range of evidence consulted and validate the bibliography. Additionally, footnotes alleviate concerns about plagiarism, as the source of comments, views, detail or others' judgements is acknowledged. Skill in the use of footnotes is also highly valued by Higher Education. A bibliography should be provided, listing the sources that have been consulted.

The role of the teacher

Teachers have a number of significant roles:

• to explain the requirements of the Historical Investigation to students
• to ensure that students do not duplicate content already covered in Components 1 and 2 and to ensure that the NEA title which forms the focus of the Historical Investigation is placed in the context of approximately 100 years
• to provide appropriate supervision of students, offering general guidance about the issue and question chosen for investigation
• to monitor the progress of the Investigation
• to submit to AQA, by 20 October in the year before intended A-level certification, an NEA title approval form. This form will require that options from Components 1 and 2 are identified, along with the title of Component 3 and its chronological range for each student
• to sign a declaration that the Investigation is the work of the individual working independently
• to inform AQA where there are concerns about malpractice, such as plagiarism or the submission of work that is not that of the student

Assessment and moderation

The Historical Investigation will be marked by centres and moderated by AQA. It is most important that centres establish rigorous internal standardisation to ensure that the rank order of the students is fair, accurate and appropriate. This is particularly important in larger centres where more than one teacher has prepared and assessed students.

The work of students is to be assessed by a levels of response mark scheme which addresses each of the following assessment objectives, with the weighting as indicated:

Mark Scheme to be used when assessing the Historical investigation

AO1: 20 marks

Demonstrate, organise and communicate knowledge and understanding to analyse and evaluate the key features related to the periods studied, making substantiated judgements and exploring concepts, as relevant, of cause, consequence, change, continuity, similarity and significance.

NOTE: An Historical investigation which fails to show an understanding of change and continuity within the context of approximately 100 years cannot be placed above Level 2 in AO1 (maximum 8 marks)

Level 5: 17–20 The response demonstrates a very good understanding of change and continuity within the context of approximately 100 years and meets the full demands of the chosen question. It is very well organised and effectively delivered. The supporting information is well-selected, specific and precise. It shows a very good understanding of key features, issues and concepts. The answer is fully analytical with a balanced argument and well-substantiated judgement.

Level 4: 13–16 The response demonstrates a good understanding of change and continuity within the context of approximately 100 years and meets the demands of the chosen question. It is well-organised and effectively communicated. There is a range of clear and specific supporting information, showing a good understanding of key features and issues, together with some conceptual awareness. The response is predominantly analytical in style with a range of direct comment relating to the question. The response is well-balanced with some judgement, which may, however, be only partially substantiated.

Level 3: 9–12 The response demonstrates an understanding of change and continuity within the context of approximately 100 years and shows an understanding of the chosen question. It provides a range of largely accurate information which shows an awareness of some of the key issues. This information may, however, be unspecific or lack precision of detail in parts. The response is effectively organised and shows adequate communication skills. There is a good deal of comment in relation to the chosen question, although some of this may be generalised. The response demonstrates some analytical qualities and balance of argument.

Level 2: 5–8 The response demonstrates some understanding of change and continuity but may have limitations in its coverage of a context of approximately 100 years. The response may be either descriptive or partial, showing some awareness of the chosen question but a failure to grasp its full demands. There is some attempt to convey material in an organised way although communication skills may be limited. The response contains some appropriate information and shows an understanding of some aspects of the investigation, but there may be some inaccuracy and irrelevance. There is some comment in relation to the question but comments may be unsupported and generalised.

Level 1: 1–4 The response demonstrates limited understanding of change and continuity and makes little reference to a context of approximately 100 years. The chosen question has been imperfectly understood and the response shows limited organisational and communication skills. The information conveyed is extremely limited in scope and parts may be irrelevant. There may be some unsupported, vague or generalised comment.

AO2: 10 marks

Analyse and evaluate appropriate source material, primary and/or contemporary to the period, within the historical context.

Level 5: 9–10 Provides a range of relevant and well-supported comments on the value of three sources of two or more different types used in the investigation to provide a balanced and convincing judgement on their merits in relation to the topic under investigation.

Level 4: 7–8 Provides relevant and well-supported comments on the value of three sources of two or more different types used in the investigation, to produce a balanced assessment on their merits in relation to the topic under investigation. Judgements may, however, be partial or limited in substantiation.

Level 3: 5–6 Provides some relevant comment on the value of three sources of at least two different types used in the Investigation. Some of the commentary is, however, of limited scope, not fully convincing or has only limited direction to the topic under investigation.

Level 2: 3–4 Either: provides some comment on the value of more than one source used in the investigation but may not address three sources in equal measure or refers to sources of the same 'type'. Or: provides some comment on the value of three sources of at least two types used in the investigation but the comment is excessively generalised and not well directed to the topic of the investigation.

Level 1: 1–2 Provides some comment on the value of at least one source used in the Investigation but the response is very limited and may be partially inaccurate. Comments are likely to be unsupported, vague or generalised.

In commenting and making judgements on the value of the sources, students will be expected to apply their own contextual knowledge and perspectives of time and place in order to assess the value and limitations of their sources as evidence. They will be expected to comment on, as appropriate to the investigation and chosen sources:

• the differing perspectives of the sources chosen
• the social, political, intellectual, religious and/or economic contexts in which the sources were written
• the credibility, authority, authenticity, consistency and comprehensiveness of the sources
• the bias, distortion or propagandist elements found in the sources

AO3: 10 marks

Analyse and evaluate, in relation to the historical context, different ways in which aspects of the past have been interpreted.

Level 5: 9–10 Shows a very good understanding of the differing historical interpretations raised by the question. There is a strong, well-substantiated and convincing evaluation of two interpretations with reference to the time, context and/or limitations placed on the historians.

Level 4: 7–8 Shows a good understanding of the differing historical interpretations raised by the question. There is some good evaluation of the two interpretations with reference to the time, context and/or limitations placed on historians, although not all comments are substantiated or convincing.

Level 3: 5–6 Shows an understanding of differing historical interpretations raised by the question. There is some supported comment on two interpretations with reference to the time, context and/or limitations placed on historians, but the comments are limited in depth and/or substantiation.

Level 2: 3–4 Shows some understanding of the differing historical interpretations raised by the question. They may refer to the time, context and/or limitations placed on the historians in an unconvincing way.

Level 1: 1–2 Shows limited understanding of the differing historical interpretations raised by the question. Comment on historical interpretations is generalised and vague.

In showing an understanding of historical interpretations and evaluating historical interpretations, students will be expected to apply their own contextual knowledge.

They will be expected, as appropriate to the investigation:

• to show an understanding of the limitations placed on historians
• to show an understanding of the significance of the time and/or context in which an historian writes
• to compare and evaluate differing historical interpretations.

NOTE: The Investigation has a limit of 4500 words. Work that exceeds this word limit will incur a 5 mark penalty. This deduction will be applied by AQA, and should not be applied by the teacher.