Unauthorized help during an assessment

Authority

This investigation was conducted under section 69 of the Public Service Employment Act (S.C. 2003, c.22, ss. 12, 13).

Issue

The purpose of this investigation was to determine whether a candidate committed fraud in an external advertised appointment process. The allegation suggested that a candidate got help to complete a written exam, contrary to the exam instructions.

Conclusion

The investigation concluded that the candidate committed fraud in the appointment process by receiving unauthorized help and using unauthorized tools to complete the written exam.

Facts

In the context of the appointment process, a written exam was administered virtually, with a test administrator monitoring candidates and their computer screens. The email invitation to candidates clearly prohibited the use of electronic devices during the exam and instructed candidates not to discuss the content of the exam with others. As well, before beginning the exam, the test administrator told candidates they were not allowed to use phones or smart watches, and that they could not have anything open on their computer. The test administrator also indicated that no one was allowed to be in the room with the candidates while they were completing their exam.

Within the first hour of the exam, the test administrator observed message notifications appearing on the candidate’s screen. The video recording of the candidate’s exam, which was reviewed during the investigation, demonstrated that the candidate received text message notifications including what appeared to be answers to the exam.

During the investigation interview, the candidate admitted to cheating during the exam by using unauthorized tools, and provided questionable explanations as to why they received messages with apparent exam answers on their computer screen. The candidate claimed that during the exam, they searched for answers to the questions by using a search engine, and texted answers from their iPad to their computer. However, the candidate denied that they got help from another person to respond to the questions.

The candidate’s testimony was not deemed credible for various reasons, including the fact that the candidate provided contradicting testimony throughout the investigation interview. As well, due to the format of the questions, it is unlikely that the candidate would have believed that a search engine could generate appropriate responses. As well, the video recording demonstrated that the candidate was not typing during the exam and was receiving answers to questions that they were not currently viewing. The most plausible explanation was that the candidate obtained help from a third party to complete the exam.

The evidence showed, on the balance of probabilities, that the candidate acted dishonestly by receiving help to complete the exam, knowing that this was contrary to the instructions. The appointment process could have been compromised if the candidate’s actions had not been detected.

Corrective actions

Following the conclusion of fraud, the Commission ordered the following:

• that the candidate be eliminated from the appointment process
• for a period of 2 years, the candidate must notify the Public Service Commission of Canada before accepting any position or work within the federal public service
  • failure to do so will result in the revocation of the appointment
• if the candidate accepts a position or work in the federal public service within the 2-year period, they must complete the Values and Ethics Foundations for Employees course offered by the Canada School of Public Service, followed by a discussion with their director
  • failure to do so will result in the revocation of their appointment

 

File Number: 24-25-09