Responsible Science Ensuring the Integrity of the Research Process: Volume II (1993) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
15 Guidelines for Professional Conduct
15 Guidelines for Professional Conduct
Pages 249-265
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 249... ...
One lesson learned from the reported cases is that ad hoc procedures do not allow universities to respond well to charges of academic fraud. Specific procedures developed in advance should help reduce the risks to everyone involved.
|
From page 250... ...
The Standing Committee On the model of the present biomedical procedures, the committee recommends that a Standing Committee on Academic Fraud be formed
|
From page 251... ...
The central functions of the Standing Committee shall be (~) to appoint specific panels with subject matter expertise to handle charges referred to the Standing Committee after preliminary investigation within the departments; (2)
|
From page 252... ...
To secure these objectives, the procedures control any conflict of interest that might arise, for example, because the party charged and the administrative official have collaborated on research that is the subject matter of the charges. The procedures further provide that the administrative official responsible for reviewing the case should notify his or her dean (or where the dean is the responsible administrative official, the provost)
|
From page 253... ...
Once the Standing Committee has received the charges of academic fraud from the appropriate administrative officer, it must appoint a panel, with at least three members, to investigate the truth of the allegations. Typically, the panel will be composed of members of the University who are knowledgeable about the subject matter of the work suspected of being fraudulent, but who are not working with the accused on the same or similar projects.
|
From page 254... ...
has found the party charged guilty of academic fraud, then the Standing Committee can reverse the decision and remand the case to the panel, or assign it to a new panel only where it thinks that the panel's findings are manifestly against the weight of the evidence or that the pane! has applied a clearly improper standard of fraud.
|
From page 255... ...
will operate under basically the same rules as the fact of fraud panel, and its work will also be reviewed by the Standing Committee after opportunity to comment in writing is provided the party under investigation. The procedures also provide that appropriate notice shall be given to appropriate parties outside the University by the appropriate dean, and the provost shall be notified of the outcome at each stage of the proceedings.
|
From page 256... ...
Gray, Professor in History and the College, Master of the New Collegiate Division, Associate Dean of the College, and Lecturer in the Law School. Jack Halpern, Louis Block Distinguished Service Professor in Chemistry.
|
From page 257... ...
~ submit further that a proceeding without lawyers would continue to have substantial protection for the accused. Decency, civility, and objectivity are all high ideals of the academy and would be expected to pervade the deliberations of He investigating committees.
|
From page 258... ...
John Schuerman PROCEDURES FOR INVESTIGATING ACADEMIC FRAUD Section I Scope of the Work The Standing Committee on Academic Fraud shall be appointed by the provost to coordinate the University's efforts to investigate allegations of academic fraud.
|
From page 259... ...
If the administrative officer is then satisfied that the case is not without substantial merit, the matter shall be forwarded to the Standing Committee on Academic Fraud, together with all records and evidence in the case. When the case is forwarded to the Standing Committee, notice shall be given to the person charged and to the person who initially brought the matter to the attention of We administrative officer.
|
From page 260... ...
A conflict of interest arises whenever He administrative officer has collaborated with the party charged on any research that is the subject matter of the complaint or on any matter closely related to it. It also arises whenever the administrative official is bound by blood or marriage to the party charged or whenever any compelling reason prevents him or her from making a fair and impartial disposition of the entire matter.
|
From page 261... ...
b. Where confidential information is relevant to an examination of academic fraud, the party charged shall not be required to produce that information except in a form that preserves the confidential character of the information in question, unless a waiver can be obtained from the relevant parties protected by the promise of confidentiality.
|
From page 262... ...
Where the pane} has made a finding that the party charged is guilty of academic fraud, its decision shall be accepted by the Standing Committee unless it determines either that the decision is against the manifest weight of We evidence or that it rests upon a clearly improper interpretation of academic fraud. In either case the Standing Committee may reverse the decision of the panel, remand it to the pane} with instructions for further consideration, or transfer the case to a new panel.
|
From page 263... ...
and the party charged. The Standing Committee shall issue its report within fifteen days after receiving the comments from the party charged and provide copies of its report, the pane!
|
From page 264... ...
Report by the Standing Committee The Standing Committee shall provide the party charged with a copy of the pane! report and an opportunity to comment on it in writing within fifteen days of its receipt.
|
From page 265... ...
Coordination of Investigation with Other Institutions When the Standing Committee learns that any person currently or formerly associated with the University is under investigation elsewhere, it shall, when appropriate, request a report as to the status of its inquiry from the investigating committee. Where any person currently or formerly associated with The University of Chicago has been found guilty of academic fraud for work done at another institution, the Standing Committee on Academic Fraud shall when appropriate form a pane!
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.