Receiving a letter summoning you to an investigatory meeting for collusion can be incredibly isolating, especially when you believed you were simply "collaborating" or helping a friend. As someone who has spent years navigating these university disciplinary procedures, I want to demystify what actually happens in that room.

An investigatory meeting for collusion is designed to unpick a very specific knot: how did two or more students submit work containing unauthorised similarities? Here is exactly what you can expect from the process.

1. The Setup: Knowing Who and What 

Before you even step foot in the meeting, procedural fairness dictates that you have the right to know the case against you. If you are accused of collusion, universities explicitly state that you must be informed of the identity of the student(s) you are accused of colluding with. You will also be provided with the evidence the panel is reviewing, usually your submitted assignments alongside the other student's work, or text-matching reports highlighting the similarities.

2. The Interview Format: Divide and Conquer 

A common fear is that you will be interrogated in the same room as your friend, leading to an awkward confrontation. In reality, universities generally prefer to interview co-accused students separately. At the University of Exeter, for example, panels are instructed to interview each group member individually in sequence. This allows the panel to hear your explanation without the influence or pressure of other students.

However, if you are interviewed separately, natural justice still applies. The panel must inform you of anything said by the other student that impacts your case, giving you a fair opportunity to respond before they make a decision.

3. The Questioning: Unpicking the Process 

Once you are in the meeting, the panel will focus on the mechanics of how the assignment was created. Take with you your version history and any notes, drafts or prep work that you've done. They are not just looking at the final text; they are investigating the process.

Expect questions like: 

• “Can you walk us through how you researched this?” or 

• “At what point did you share your draft?” 

The panel is trying to draw a firm line between permitted collaboration (discussing general ideas) and unauthorised collusion (sharing actual files, screens, or written work).

Be honest about your process. If you shared a file "just to give them inspiration" admit it. Providing your work for another student to use is an academic offence in itself, regardless of whether you received a financial reward or intended for them to copy it.

4. The Outcome: Individual Judgments 

A key unwritten rule of collusion meetings is that while the investigation is joint, the judgment is individual. The panel will reach an outcome for each student based on the evidence directly relating to them.

For example, if the evidence shows one student coerced another, or if one student stole the other's work without their knowledge, the penalties applied will differ significantly. The panel can penalise one specific individual as the sole party at fault, or impose a collective penalty if both are equally responsible.

Your Best Strategy 

Never go into a collusion meeting alone. Always bring a supporter, such as an advisor from your Students’ Union, who can ensure the procedural rules are followed. Above all, be honest about how the collaboration occurred. Panels value insight and contrition far more than a tangled web of excuses.

What to Do Next: Prepare Your Written Defence

Before you step into that room, the panel will almost certainly ask you to submit a written statement explaining your side of the story. Do not write this blindly. How you phrase your explanation of the "collaboration" can be the difference between a minor warning and a formal misconduct penalty.

You need to present your timeline, your timestamps, and your evidence clearly and professionally.

I have spent years reading both successful and disastrous student statements. To help you get this right, I have built the E.S.G. Academic Misconduct Defence System. It includes:

• Copy-and-paste statement templates: these have been specifically designed for collusion and unauthorised sharing.

• A 72-page Survival Guide: detailing exactly how panels trap students during questioning.

• Frameworks: for presenting your digital timestamps and version histories effectively.

👉 Click here to download the Defence Templates and Survival Guide

Don't let a poorly worded email ruin your degree. Get your evidence organised today.