Academic integrity
TaleemPK exists to assist users in understanding academic material. It does not exist to complete a user's work on their behalf, and it will not be used to facilitate misconduct during a live examination. This document defines that distinction with precision.
1. Permitted assistance
- Requesting guidance on the approach to a category of question.
- Requesting an explanation of why a particular step in a solution is correct.
- Submitting an attempted solution and identifying where it is incorrect. This is the single most productive use of the platform and typically produces the most useful responses.
- Sharing notes, summaries and worked examples.
- Practising using past examination papers.
- Explaining a solution to another user, which is itself an effective method of confirming one's own understanding.
2. Prohibited conduct resulting in account termination
- Circulating an examination paper while it is being sat.
- Requesting or supplying answers during an examination.
- Sharing material intended to remain confidential prior to an examination, including a leaked paper or an unreleased marking scheme.
- Requesting that another person complete an assignment for submission as one's own work.
- Offering to complete assignments for other users, whether for payment or otherwise.
- Impersonating another individual in an assessment.
This is the sole category of conduct for which a first offence may result in account termination without prior warning, and in which the platform will cooperate with a requesting examination board or institution.
3. The intermediate category
Between the two categories above lies the matter of homework assistance. A request such as "Question 7, page 143, answer required" submitted the evening before a deadline does not, in substance, reflect a request to understand the material.
Such requests are not prohibited outright, as the underlying circumstance is not always as it appears — in some instances, a user is genuinely at an impasse on a final step. However, the community is asked not to provide a direct answer. The more constructive response is one that leads the user to the answer independently, and responses of this kind are those recognised as resolving the question.
A user submitting such a request is advised to include their own attempted working. This produces a more useful response and equips the user to address similar questions independently.
4. Precedence of institutional policy
Every school, college and university maintains its own policy governing collaboration and permissible assistance on assessed work. That policy takes precedence over this document. Conduct permissible on this platform may nonetheless breach an institution's own policy, and the platform cannot provide protection from the consequences of such a breach. Where doubt exists, a user is advised to consult their teacher directly.
5. Uploaded material
Where a user uploads a teacher's notes, the source must be attributed. Where an institute has instructed against circulation of its material, that instruction must be observed. Certain material is genuinely not the uploader's to share, and Copyright and takedown governs the consequence of doing so regardless.
6. Reporting misconduct
Where a paper is observed being circulated during an examination, this should be reported immediately using the Exam leak or cheating category. Such reports receive priority handling, given the narrow window within which action remains effective.