For any questions please send e-mail to: NDSU.Policy.Manual@ndsu.edu
SECTION 326: ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
SOURCE: NDSU President & NDSU University Senate Policy
- I.
- PHILOSOPHY
One of the basic responsibilities of a faculty member is to be engaged in scholarly inquiry. Consistent with this responsibility is the expectation for strict integrity in scholarly activity. Integrity is defined to mean that the results reported are honest and accurate and in keeping with generally accepted research practices of the discipline.1 Because misconduct in scholarly inquiry threatens the confidence in the academic endeavor, it is the responsibility of the university to foster an academic environment that discourages misconduct in all endeavors of scholarly activity and to develop policies and procedures to deal forthrightly with possible misconduct associated with scholarly activity. The AAU Committee on Integrity of Research concluded that informal and quiet efforts to deal with intellectual dishonesty were no longer adequate.2
- II.
- PURPOSE
These policies and procedures are set forth to define a process to review, investigate, resolve, and report allegations of academic misconduct. They are directed toward governing behaviors in the pursuit of professional scholarly activities, and they are consistent with the principle of self-regulation in maintaining integrity in scholarly inquiry.3
- III.
- DEFINITIONS
"Academic or scientific misconduct" shall mean fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, misrepresentation of sources, breach of confidentiality, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the scientific community for proposing, for conducting, or reporting research; or material failure to comply with a sponsor's requirements that uniquely relate to the conduct of the research. It does not include honest error, or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.
"Inquiry" shall mean information gathering and initial fact-finding to determine whether an allegation or apparent instance of misconduct warrants an investigation.
"Investigation" shall mean the formal examination and evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if misconduct has occurred.
"Plagiarism" shall mean taking over ideas, methods, or written words of another without acknowledgment of and with the intention that they be credited as the work of the deceiver. Different academic disciplines may have their own separate definition which may add additional elements that need to be taken into consideration in an allegation of plagiarism.
"Scholarly inquiry", "creative activity", and "research" shall be considered synonymous terms.
- IV.
- DISPOSITION OF ALLEGATIONS INVOLVING ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT
- A.
- General Comments
Due to the wide variety of endeavors of scholarly activity, no one set of guidelines can cover all situations. Also, because of the seriousness of the nature of this subject, several basic principles must be used to guide the processes:
- Specifically, the allegation(s) must receive an immediate and appropriate
as well as thorough and impartial examination.
- The person (originator of the allegation) who in good faith reports
apparent misconduct must be protected from recrimination.
- The accused must be afforded confidential treatment to the maximum
extend possible while being given an opportunity to respond to the
allegations and provide a defense during the inquiry or investigation.
- Any university action in resolving these allegations must comply
with the procedural requirements of the North Dakota State Board of
Higher Education ("Regulations on Academic Freedom, Tenure, and Due
Process") or the provisions of the NDSU Student Policies Handbook,
as appropriate.
- If allegations of apparent misconduct have been made with the malicious
intent of destroying a career and reputation, the evidence of this
fabrication is to be presented to the Provost/Vice President for Academic
Affairs for appropriate examination and possible disciplinary action.
- During the process of investigation, disclosure will be made only as specified in the regulations of the sponsoring agency or as required by the North Dakota Open Records Act. Any violation of this rule is also considered a matter for disciplinary action by the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs.
These two processes, inquiry and investigation, will be handled by separate policies and procedures.
- Specifically, the allegation(s) must receive an immediate and appropriate
as well as thorough and impartial examination.
- V.
- PHASE I: INQUIRY - POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
- The originator of the allegation of apparent misconduct has the
option of bringing the allegation and evidence to the Chair/Head of
the Department, the Dean of the College involved, the Dean of the
Graduate School, or the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
(hereafter referred to as the receiver of the allegation).
- Upon receipt of such allegation(s), the receiver of the allegation
must immediately inform the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
(or specified designee) concerning the nature of the allegations.
If the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs is the receiver,
then the President must be informed.
- 2.a.
- The Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs will confer
with the Presiding Officer of the University Senate and the Chair
of the Committee on Academic Integrity. After examining the allegation
and supporting evidence, they will determine whether or not an
inquiry is warranted. If an inquiry is not warranted, a memorandum-for-file
will be drafted to include a statement of the allegation and the
rationale for not conducting an inquiry. This shall be filed in
the Office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
for three years. A copy of this document will be given to the
accused.
- 2.b.
- If an inquiry is warranted, a statement of allegation will be prepared which also identifies the originator(s) of the allegation. The Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs will immediately notify the accused, the appropriate department chair, and academic dean, and shall appoint a committee (para. 3) to conduct the inquiry. A copy of the allegation with the available evidence will be provided to the accused.
- The Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs will appoint a committee
consisting of non-administrative, tenured faculty members with the
rank of professor. Preference may be given to faculty from the accused's
discipline or a closely related discipline, to meet with the receiver
of the allegation. Members of the committee may be external to the
University. After consultation with the University General Counsel, the committee
will make a preliminary inquiry into the allegation(s) to determine
if there is sufficient basis to conduct an investigation. As a part
of the inquiry, the accused must be interviewed.
- Upon completion of the inquiry, a report shall be prepared to include
a statement of the allegation, the evidence that was reviewed, a summary
of relevant interviews, and the conclusions of the inquiry.
- The accused shall be given a copy of the report of the inquiry.
If desired, he/she/they may respond to that report and his/her/their
comments become part of the record. Opinion by a recognized authority
in the accused's field may be included.
- The inquiry should be completed within 60 days of its initiation
unless circumstances which can be documented to indicate reasons for
exceeding this 60 day period.
- If it is determined that there is no basis for the alleged misconduct,
a single copy of the report shall be forwarded to the Office of the
Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs, to be placed in secured
storage and maintained for a period of three years. This is to permit
a later, independent assessment of the reasons for determining that
an investigation was not warranted should this be requested by an
appropriate agency. Three years after the completion of the inquiry,
all documentation shall be destroyed. If, at any time, the document
is requested by any party, the accused shall be notified. A complete
copy of the report will also be provided to the accused.
- All work of those involved should, to the extent possible, remain confidential.
- The originator of the allegation of apparent misconduct has the
option of bringing the allegation and evidence to the Chair/Head of
the Department, the Dean of the College involved, the Dean of the
Graduate School, or the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs
(hereafter referred to as the receiver of the allegation).
- VI.
- PHASE II: INVESTIGATION - POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
- If the findings from the inquiry provide sufficient basis for conducting
an investigation, the investigation must be initiated within a thirty
day period after written notification to the accused.
- Because of its expanded nature, the investigation would be conducted
by a standing committee of the University Senate, the Committee on Academic
Integrity.
- The Committee on Academic Integrity shall be appointed by the University
Senate Executive Committee. The Committee on Academic Integrity shall
consist of a non-administrative, tenured faculty member with the rank
of professor from each of the colleges and schools of the university.
If no faculty member with the rank of professor is available from a college
or school, a tenured associate professor may be appointed to serve on
the committee representing that respective college or school. The committee
shall have staggered three-year terms and annually shall appoint a chair.
Its purpose is to provide investigative assistance to the University community
on cases involving academic misconduct. If a member of the Committee on
Academic Integrity feels that a conflict of interest in a particular case
may occur, this person may recuse him/herself and the Executive Committee
will provide a substitute.
- Upon receipt of the findings of the inquiry, the Committee on Academic
Integrity shall select a panel of three persons competent to investigate
the allegations. Because of the specialized nature of the evidence to
be investigated, as well as the gravity of the charges, the panel may
have to consist of one or more members chosen from outside the University.
Every effort should be made to include a peer with similar rank to the
accused.
- The investigating panel shall comply with the following guidelines:
- a.
- The panel may request any evidence considered necessary to conduct
a complete investigation of the matter. Normally, this will include
an examination of all documentation, including but not necessarily
limited to, relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence,
and memoranda of telephone calls. Whenever possible, interviews should
be conducted of all individuals involved either in making the allegation
or against whom the allegation is made as well as other individuals
who might have information regarding key aspects of the allegations;
complete summaries of these interviews should be prepared and provided
to the interviewed person(s) for comment or revision, and be included
as part of the investigation file and furnished to the accused.
- b.
- An accused must be notified in writing that an investigation is
being conducted, must be interviewed by the panel, and has the right
to call any witnesses or produce any evidence in defense. In addition,
the accused has the right to have an attorney accompany him/her/them
to the interview. If an attorney for the accused is present, the panel
may request that the University provide legal counsel to assist it
as well.
- c.
- The panel will deliberate and reach its conclusions and write its
final report in executive session. Further, the panel must prepare
and maintain all documentation to substantiate its findings.
- d.
- The investigative panel shall then submit the report with all of
the relevant evidence to the Committee on Academic Integrity.
- e.
- The investigation by the panel is to remain confidential unless
disclosure is required by the North Dakota Open Records Act or by
the sponsor's guidelines.
- f.
- The Committee on Academic Integrity shall review the panel's report
to make certain that due process has been observed and that there
are not irregularities in the panel's work.
- g.
- If it is determined that the allegations of misconduct are groundless,
a report with supporting documentation shall be forwarded to the Office
of Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs to be retained appropriately
for a period of three years. All persons and agencies involved in
the investigation shall be notified of the conclusion. A copy of all
documents shall be furnished to the accused. If the documents are
requested by any party, the accused shall be notified.
- h.
- If the allegations are substantiated, the Committee on Academic
Integrity shall forward the report to the Provost/Vice President for
Academic Affairs and the President with recommendations for appropriate
disciplinary action.
- (1)
- In the case of a federal grant, a final report prepared by the
Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs describing policies
and procedures under which the investigation was conducted, the
nature of the allegations, how information was obtained, all persons
interviewed with text or summary of interviews, the findings,
the basis for the final decision, and a description of disciplinary
action taken by the institution, must be sent to the appropriate
agency.4
- (2)
- It shall be the responsibility of the University to communicate
the results of the investigation to collaborators, journals, publishers,
professional societies, and sponsoring agencies with whom the
accused has had professional contact.
- (3)
- The investigation should ordinarily be completed within 120 days of its initiation. If it cannot be completed within that time, then documentation for the reasons for exceeding this period must be made available in the report.
- If the findings from the inquiry provide sufficient basis for conducting
an investigation, the investigation must be initiated within a thirty
day period after written notification to the accused.
- VII.
- SPECIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Normally, the inquiry or investigation will be conducted in such a manner as to protect the privacy/confidentiality of all involved. However, if at the stage of the inquiry or investigation, any of the following conditions exist, there must be immediate notification to the sponsoring agency:
- there is an immediate health hazard involved;
- there is an immediate need to protect agency funds or equipment;
- there is an immediate need to protect the interests of the person(s) making the allegation or the individuals who are subject to the allegations as well as his/her co-investigators and associates;
- it is probable that the alleged incident is going to be reported publicly; or
- there is reasonable indication of possible criminal violation. In this instance, the institution must inform the appropriate sponsoring agency, if necessary, within 24 hours of obtaining that information.
- VIII.
- DISPOSITION OF CHARGES INVOLVING FISCAL IMPROPRIETY
In those instances wherein an allegation may arise involving fiscal impropriety of any nature, the originator must bring such charge(s) with the available evidence before the Department Chair, Academic Dean, Graduate Dean, Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs, or Vice President for Finance and Administration. The individual receiving the accusation must consult the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs. At this point, the appropriate department chair and academic dean must be notified, and the accused must be interviewed after the accused is given copies of all available evidence.
If the explanation is not adequate, the Provost/Vice President for Academic affairs will convene a committee of five including faculty, at least one (non-involved) academic dean, and a university financial officer (such as the Controller, Director of Grants and Contracts, etc.) to investigate the allegations. The accused, who has been notified that the committee is being appointed, has the right to call any witnesses and produce any evidence in his/her defense, as well as have an attorney accompany him/her to any committee deliberations. If an attorney for the defense is present, the committee may request that the University provide legal counsel to assist it as well. The committee, however, will come to its conclusions and write its final report in private. The final report shall be sent to the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs. If the committee finds that the allegations are upheld, the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs shall take appropriate action as prescribed by the University's policies. If the committee finds that the accusations are groundless, all records of the proceeding be maintained in a sequestered file in the Office of the Provost/Vice President for Academic Affairs for three years. A copy of the final report shall be provided to the accused. If the documents are requested by any party, the accused shall be notified.
- The Responsible Conduct of Research in Health Sciences, Institute of Medicine, National Research Council, (1989).
- Report of the AAU Committee on Integrity of Researching, Associations of American Universities, (1983).
- In addition, these policies and procedures are necessary since the federal government requires that each entity applying for research grants or agreements under the Public Health Service must establish explicit, uniform policies and procedures for investigating and reporting instances of alleged or apparent misconduct involving research activities that are supported with funds made available under the Public Health Service Act. The appropriate acts providing authority are: 42 CFR Part 50, Section 493, Public Health Service Act, as amended, 99 Stat. 874-875, (42 u.s.c. 289b); Section 501(f), Public Health Service Act, as amended, 102 Stat. 4213(42 u.s.c. 290aa(f)).
- For example, the Office of Scientific Inquiry, in the Office of the Director of the National Institutes of Health.
HISTORY: May 14, 1990; Amended April 1992; June 1995, December 2002, October 2003, October 2007.