AASU Policy for Addressing Allegations of Misconduct in Scientific and Scholarly Research

*** For more information on ethical conduct in scientific research, read "On Being A Scientist: Responsible Conduct in Research" from the National Academy Press.

Armstrong Atlantic State University has long embraced the principle that honesty is an essential component of scholarly activity. Principal Investigators and others in positions of responsibility for the conduct of research and scholarly activity are expected to exercise reasonable supervision of those under their direction to ensure the integrity of the research or scholarly activity being conducted.

The university assumes primary responsibility for investigating and resolving allegations of scientific and scholarly misconduct by its campus community. This responsibility holds regardless of whether the activity involved was funded by external agencies. Assumption of this responsibility is consistent with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 45 CFR 689, though in some cases federal reporting requirements also pertain.
Top

Definition of misconduct in scientific and scholarly research

For the purposes of these procedures, misconduct in scholarly research is defined as :

         1) fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scholarly community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research. It does not include honest error or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.

         2) retaliation of any kind against a person who reported or provided information about suspected alleged  misconduct and who has not acted in bad faith." (National Science Foundation Dear Colleague Letter, August 16, 1991).
Top

Reporting and confidentiality

It is difficult to balance the need to preserve the confidentiality of those persons bringing allegations of scientific and scholarly misconduct with the rights of persons to have knowledge of their accusers. Too little protection for those bringing allegations discourages legitimate reporting, and too secretive a process endangers the researcher against whom allegations are made. It must be recognized that a researcher's reputation is paramount to his/her career, and that serious consideration must be given before anyone takes action to impair that reputation. Just as care must be taken to ensure that those filing legitimate allegations in good faith are protected from reprisals, the University will not tolerate actions of this nature that are taken without foundation and/or with malicious intent.

To ensure both the opportunity to make reports and the internal protection of those reporting, the identity of the person filing the allegation of misconduct shall be kept confidential during the inquiry state of this procedure, unless that person consents to the release of his/her name. Similarly, those accused of such acts are entitled to have all proceedings handled in confidence. However, the university is also required to comply with the Open Records Act and, should these come into conflict, the law will prevail. The university will not tolerate retaliation against those filing reports under this policy.
Top

Receipt of Allegations and Inquiry

Allegations of scientific or scholarly misconduct should be reported within a department to the department head. In the case of a conflict of interest on the part of the department head or dean, the allegations should be reported to the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty. All allegations shall be made in writing and forwarded, through the dean to the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty.

Upon receipt of a written allegation, the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty shall initiate an inquiry into the allegation. After discussing the matter with the party raising the issue, the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty shall inform the accused person that an allegation of misconduct has been made, and provide that person with a copy of the written allegation. The person accused will be given a reasonable amount of time in which to respond to the allegation. The Vice-President and Dean of Faculty may seek advice at this stage of the inquiry to evaluate the validity of the allegation.

Depending upon the nature of the discipline and the accusation made, it may be necessary for the original databooks or other laboratory material to be captured to ensure the accuracy of the original record. The Vice-President and Dean of Faculty is authorized to obtain all records he deems necessary to safeguard the records. Faculty and staff are required to release these records upon request. The Vice-President and Dean of Faculty will be responsible for safeguarding the records and, in cases where the records are necessary for the continuation of the research, will provide copies for use by investigators.

The Vice-President and Dean of Faculty, in consultation with the appropriate school dean, shall determine within 30 days, on the basis of the inquiry, whether or not to initiate an investigation. In circumstances which require more time, this timeline may be extended for a reasonable period. Should it be determined that no reasonable basis exists to initiate an investigation, the party making the allegation, the person against whom the allegation is made, the dean, and department head, shall be so informed. The Vice-President and Dean of faculty will maintain the record of inquiry, apart from the faculty or staff member's personnel file, or the student's graduate record.

Should the person bringing the allegation be dissatisfied with the closure of the matter, he/she may request, within 30 days of notice of closure, that the President review the matter. Should the President concur with the decision, the matter will be closed. Should the President not concur, he will advise the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty to initiate an investigation.
Top

Investigation

Should an investigation be warranted, an ad hoc advisory committee will be appointed of at least three scholars who have no responsibility for the activity under inquiry, who can be impartial, and who have no interests which would conflict with the university's interest in securing a fair and thorough inquiry. The inquiry committee may, but need not, include individuals from outside the university. The committee will operate in executive session. The committee's responsibility is to examine all pertinent information, review all records, and take such testimony as necessary. The committee shall allow the person against whom the allegation is made an opportunity to respond to the allegation and information collected. The accused person may be accompanied by legal council if he/she desires. However, because this is an allegation of scientific or scholarly misconduct, the faculty member is expected to participate fully in the process.

The committee shall provide the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty, and the individual against whom the allegation was made, a written report including findings of fact, a preliminary determination, and any recommendations based on these facts within 90 calendar days of its appointment. This timeline may be extended when deemed necessary and reasonable.
Top

After receipt of the report, the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty, in consultation with the school dean, will make his/her decision.

• a) If it is determined that no scholarly or scientific misconduct has occurred, the latter will be closed, and the following actions taken :
  • i) The person making the allegation and the accused researcher will be notified of the decision;

    ii) The researcher will be consulted to determine what actions, if any, should be taken to ensure that the researcher's reputation is secured, and implementation of those actions. including issuing statements of exoneration, if required;

    iii) The appropriate federal agency or other funding agency will be notified of the outcome of the investigation.

  b) If it is determined that scientific or scholarly misconduct has occurred and that further action is warranted, the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty will take the following actions :

  • i) If the action is against a faculty member, deliver to the appropriate dean a written report stating that reasonable cause exists to adjudicate charges of wrongdoing brought against the faculty member, with enough of the underlying facts to provide reasons for this conclusion;

    ii) If the action is against a professional or classified staff member, deliver a statement of the basis of the decision and notice of appropriate disciplinary or dismissal action in accordance with the applicable professional or classified staff rules;

    iii) If the action is against a student, deliver a statement of the basis for the decision and notice of appropriate disciplinary or dismissal action in accordance with the University Student Code.

  In all situations, the dean of the appropriate college shall be notified.
  Top

Notifying funding agencies and other outside entities

The Vice-President and Dean of Faculty is responsible for notifying appropriate federal or other granting agencies of outcomes of inquiries, that an investigation has been initiated, and the results of any investigation, as that agencies rules may require. The Vice President and Dean of Faculty is authorized to take such actions, in consultation with the college dean, as are necessary or prudent to ensure the protection of the university and the funds of the granting agency during the period of inquiry, investigation, or any resulting adjudication. In addition, the Vice-President and Dean of Faculty may require that other actions be taken, such as notification of editors or publishers if the work has been published, to ensure the integrity of the scholarly process.
Top

Officially Approved: 10/12/95