Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Part D: Policies and Procedures for Handling Allegations of Misconduct in ...
Pages 266-273

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 266...
... University policies set forth expectations for high standards of ethical behavior for faculty and students involved in research and provide procedures for addressing allegations of misconduct in research. Those policies and procedures are set forth in the Bylaws of the Academic Senate, the University Policy on Faculty Code of Conduct and the Administration of Discipline, and University Policies Applying to NOTE: Draft revised June 12, 1991; revision is ongoing.
From page 267...
... II. PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING ALLEGATIONS OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT The University will continue to take prompt and vigorous action to investigate and address allegations of misconduct in research, based on the following principles: Institutional and academic responsibility for self-regulation; · Mechanisms to protect to the greatest extent possible the due process rights of the accused, the interests of those making allegations, and the public interest; · Compliance with requirements for timely notification of funding agencies; · The highest degree of confidentiality compatible with an effective response and applicable sponsor reporting requirements (Appendix, item 3~; and · Precautions against real or apparent conflict of interest.
From page 268...
... Suspicion of fraudulent or unethical research practices should be reported immediately to the chair of the department or the director of the organized research unit. A complaint may alternatively be made to the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, Dean of the School of Medicine, the Dean of Marine Sciences, or their designees.
From page 269...
... 7. The dean may consult the faculty committee or, if an investigator was used, an ad hoc committee of faculty to decide whether to seek an informal resolution or whether to proceed wig a formal investigation.
From page 270...
... 8. The dean, in consultation with the Ad Hoc Investigative Committee, shall inform the funding agency at appropriate times consistent with agency requirements that an investigation is being undertaken and of the results of the investigation.
From page 271...
... Il. If the Ad Hoc Investigative Committee determines that the accused has engaged in unethical or fraudulent research practices, it shall submit a written report of its findings and recommendations to the dean and may recommend a disciplinary action.
From page 272...
... The Academic Senate has agreed to allow the investigation by the Ad Hoc Investigative Committee to stand in lieu of the appointment of the administrative officer called for in Academic Senate Bylaw 230. The Academic Senate has also agreed to extend coverage of Bylaw 230 to the following: Adjunct Professor
From page 273...
... Discipline of unrepresented appointees in this category must conform to the requirements of APM 140 and PPM 230-5. Included in this category are Academic Administrators, Academic Coordinators, Program Coordinators, Continuing Education Specialists, CME Fellows, Postgraduate Researchers, Professional Research Series, Research Associates, Research Fellows, Specialist Series, Visiting Researchers, Clinical Affiliates, Visiting Professor Series, Language Assistants, Readers, Research Assistants, Teaching Assistants, Teaching Fellows, Visiting Scholars, and Librarians excluded from the bargaining unit because of their supervisorial status.


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.