In terms of The National Policy on the Conduct, Administration and Management of the National Senior Certificate (Section 78) in Gazette 30048, each school must establish a School Assessment Irregularities Committee (SAIC) to deal with internal assessment irregularities involving learners.


2.1 The SAIC will consist of the following persons:

(a) The Deputy Principal or district official serving the school (chairperson of the SAIC)

(b) The Assessment Head

(c) One person from the school management team (SMT)

(d) One person from the teaching staff who is not a member of the SMT

(e) One member of the SGB

2.2 The SAIC may co-opt members on a needs basis. The following persons may be co-opted:

(a) One subject / learning area specialist from the school

(b) One subject / learning area specialist from the district

2.3 In addition, one representative from each of the recognised teacher unions will be nominated as an observer where required.


3.1 All members of the SAIC will be appointed by the school principal, and a list of names and their designation must be submitted to the ASSESSMENT HEAD.

3.2 The duration of the term of office of the SAIC will be three years.


The SAIC will have jurisdiction in any alleged internal assessment irregularities, both at GET and FET levels, including irregularities relating to the CTAs and the Grade 12 assessment.These irregularities may occur during the various stages of the internal assessment process, and they would include, among others, irregularities in connection with the following:

  • Compilation of internal assessment marks
  • Monitoring and moderation of internal assessment
  • Conditions under which teachers conduct internal assessment
  • Conditions under which learners are internally assessed
  • Capturing and processing of data derived from internal assessment
  • Setting and moderation of internal assessment question papers and tasks
  • Any other irregularity related to internal assessment



The SAIC must

(a) work closely with the examinations officials based at the district office;

(b) investigate all irregularities by teachers in the internal assessment process;

(c) investigate all internal assessment irregularities by any other person involved in the internal assessment process;

(d) investigate all irregularities committed by learners during the internal assessment process;

(e) investigate any other internal assessment irregularity as and when requested by the district director or his or her nominee and

(f) report all internal assessment irregularities, via the district offices, to the district assessment irregularities committee (DAIC) if necessary


6.1 Irregularities involving learners during internal assessment may include the following:

6.1.1 A candidate who refuses to abide by any or all of the minimum requirements for

the compilation of a mark for internal assessment in a subject. The SAIC must either approve or reject the reason for the refusal given by the candidate. A “valid reason”, in this context, constitutes the following:

  • Medical reasons as supported by a valid medical certificate issued by a registered medical practitioner;
  • Humanitarian reasons, e.g. the death of an immediate family member, if supported by valid written evidence;
  • The learner appearing in a court hearing; supported by written evidence; or
  • Any other reason as may be declared valid by the SAIC.

6.1.2 A candidate who presents work that is not his or her own work. This may take various forms and may include the following:

(i)     Copying verbatim from another source (In this case, if the teacher is suspicious and has evidence of sections or the complete assignment having been lifted verbatim from another source, this must be declared as an irregularity).

(ii)    An assignment or project that is not his or her own effort. (This may have been completed by another learner or person or his or her parent, or even purchased).

(iii)    Reproduction of an assignment or project from another learner and there is evidence of such copying.

(iv)    Work that has been previously presented and for which credits were received, which could either be his or her own effort or that of another individual.

(v)      The whole or part of a portfolio that is not his or her own, but that of another learner from the same school / learning institution or another school / learning institution.

(vi)       Any dishonest act aimed at misleading the teacher in terms of the authenticity or originality of the portfolio presented.

6.1.3    A candidate who, in respect of any component of a mark for an internal assessment that is completed under controlled conditions, does any of the following:

(i)           Creates a disturbance or intimidates others, or behaves in an improper or unseemly manner.

(ii)         Despite a warning is drunk or behaves in a disorderly manner.

(iii)       Disregards the arrangements or reasonable instructions of the teacher, despite a warning.

(iv)       Continues to disregard assessment regulations, despite a warning.

(v)        With the writing of an internal examination, engages in dishonest acts before the commencement of the examination, while the examination is being written, or as the answer scripts are handed in or marked.

[Refer to Section 4 (4) (c) to (f) of the National Policy document]

6.1.4     A candidate making a false statement in respect of the authenticity of a particular component of a mark for internal assessment.The fabrication of evidence in general and especially in respect of the stipulations of 6.1.1 above constitutes fraud, and will be dealt with as such.

6.2       Irregularities involving teachers and other assessment officials during internal assessment (CASS/SBA) may occur during the following stages at the school or learning institution:

(a) The compilation of the mark for internal assessment

(b) The monitoring or moderation of the mark achieved in an internal assessment

(c) The capturing and processing of assessment data

(d) Investigations in respect of suspected internal assessment irregularities.

The assessment irregularities may include the following:

(a) The teacher wilfully and intentionally, and without a valid reason, fails to satisfy the requirements or excludes one or more assessment tasks from the compilation of the final assessment marks.

(b) The teacher or practitioner alters, in other words, either decreases or increases the marks of candidates without the approval of the head of the institution.

(c) The teacher wilfully provides assistance to a learner that advantages a learner unfairly in comparison with other learners.

(d) The teacher collaborates with a learner who presents the whole or part of a portfolio that is not her or his own work. Suspected internal irregularities involving teachers constitutes an act of misconduct and will be dealt with in accordance with the Employment of Educators Act. Suspected internal irregularities involving assessment officials employed in terms of the Public Service Act constitutes an act of misconduct and will be dealt with in accordancewith the relevant Public Service Regulation.


The SAIC must report all internal assessment irregularities in writing, to the Principal’s office, within seven days of the alleged irregularity. In cases where an irregularity requires an investigation, the initial reporting must be followed by a detailed report, once the investigation has been concluded.


The SAIC will recommend, via the Principal, the sanctions to be imposed for each alleged irregularity investigated and confirm.


 Cellphone Policy >>