Appendix E

Statement on Professional Ethics and Faculty Obligations and Guidelines for Review of Professional Misconduct

The Statement on Professional Ethics and Faculty Obligations and Guidelines for Review of Professional Misconduct was adopted by the University Senate on September 29, 1972, and revised by that body on April 18, 1986.

I. Teaching

The freedom traditionally accorded to members of the faculty to decide for themselves in large measure what they teach and how imposes a correlative obligation of responsible self-discipline. Every effort must therefore be made to be accurate, to be objective, to demonstrate appropriate restraint, and to show respect for the opinions of others. Faculty members may not enroll or refuse to enroll students on the basis of those students' beliefs, or otherwise discriminate arbitrarily or capriciously among them. Evaluation of students and awards of grade and credit must be based on academic performance professionally judged, not on matters extraneous to that performance; grades and other evaluations shall be provided to the University promptly as required for each student, for each class. Faculty members shall meet their classes as announced and shall also make themselves regularly available to their students outside the classroom. When it is impossible to meet a class, alternative instruction shall be offered, and adequate notice given, such as to satisfy the students' expectations and the faculty member's contract with the University; this obligation can be met in various ways, and the method adopted should be endorsed by the department chairman or the dean. Exploitation of students or of junior colleagues for private advantage is to be avoided, and all significant assistance must be publicly acknowledged. Faculty members must respond conscientiously to requests from students or former students for references; the confidential nature of teacher-student relationships is to be respected.

II. Faculty Relationship

All members of the faculty share responsibility for the governance of the University and for the preservation of an atmosphere of scholarship and rational discourse. Faculty members may not use their positions to cause interference with personal security, property, or freedom of movement, expression, or assembly on campus. Faculty members should join in the broadest possible search for academic talent, and in the appointment or promotion of the best qualified candidate, making every effort to be objective in their professional judgments of colleagues and potential colleagues. Faculty members must acknowledge indebtedness to other scholars. Senior faculty members should stand ready to counsel their junior colleagues and to give them due credit for any assistance given. When faculty members assume obligations outside the University, they should assess the amount and character of these obligations with due regard to their paramount responsibilities within the University. When a faculty member speaks or acts as a private person outside the University, a special effort must be made to avoid giving the impression that he or she speaks or acts on behalf of the University.

III. Research

A climate must be maintained at the University where creativity and productivity in research are promoted in an atmosphere of high ethical standards. It is essential that the integrity of research be maintained at all times, since long-standing, often irreversible damage can result from breach of academic commitment to truth in investigative activities. Misconduct in research is herein defined as gross lack of integrity in conducting basic or clinical investigations involving dishonesty, knowing misrepresentation of data, and/or violation of accepted standards. Academic misconduct or fraud can destroy public trust in the academic community as a whole and in our own institution in particular; it can shatter individual careers; it can undermine sensitive relationships between investigators, students, and the public.

In modern collaborative research, the implications of academic misconduct or fraud go far beyond the individual; they also affect collaborators whose own work has been committed to objective search for truth. The specter of guilt by association may lurk in the background for many years to come. Therefore, joint authorship requires joint responsibility; each author claiming credit for the entire work must also be aware of joint discredit. Investigators in collaborative research projects each must make reasonable and periodic inquiry as to the integrity of and processes involved in gathering and evaluating data. It should be understood that overall responsibility for the integrity of collaborative research rests with the principal investigator. Senior investigators cannot be allowed to escape the consequences of the discovery of misconduct or fraud committed under their supervision.

Every member of the faculty has a duty to respond promptly to any well-founded suspicion of academic misconduct or fraud. Allegations must be made with caution; nevertheless, the results of long-standing misconduct or fraud are so devastating that potential irregularities must be brought promptly to the attention of the proper authorities. At the same time, the rights of those whose research procedures or results are in question from the standpoint of possible falsification or adulteration must be carefully protected while a careful and fair investigation is being carried out.

IIIA. GUIDELINES FOR THE REVIEW OF PROFESSIONAL MISCONDUCT OR FRAUD IN RESEARCH

Although prevention of dishonesty in research is best achieved by self-discipline, researchers have direct responsibilities to the University, to research sponsors, to their peers, and more generally to the community of scholars at large. Because of the seriousness of any failure to meet this responsibility, and because of the importance of clearing the innocent researcher of any suspicion of wrongdoing, prompt and fair resolution of inquiries concerning misconduct or fraud in research is necessary. An investigator is assumed to be innocent until an investigation should prove otherwise. Expeditious handling of matters such as these is essential.

Allegation of possible misconduct or fraud in research must be brought to the attention of the dean of the school. Although procedures may vary from school to school to reflect particular circumstances, the following guidelines should be followed. The dean will initiate a preliminary review with the department chairman, and at his discretion may appoint an ad hoc committee. The researcher will be notified that a preliminary inquiry is in progress and told the sources of the allegation. The preliminary inquiry should be conducted within a period no longer than four weeks. If the dean is satisfied that there is no evidence of improper conduct or fraud, he will convey his conclusion to the researcher and to the individual initiating the inquiry.

Should the preliminary inquiry suggest sufficient cause to warrant further investigation, the dean will appoint an ad hoc committee of whatever experts he deems are needed for this investigation to be carried out as thoroughly as possible. The committee is authorized to require the cooperation, on behalf of the institution, of all persons concerned and to consult with whatever additional experts may be needed. The researcher will be given the opportunity to review any other materials used to substantiate the charge, and he may also submit any explanatory materials. The deliberations, however, of the committee are to be kept absolutely confidential. The researcher has the right to receive advice and counsel throughout this process from a person of his or her choosing. However, direct interviews with the committee will be conducted without the researcher's advisor or counsel being present unless the committee agrees that this is appropriate.

A copy of the findings of the review will be sent to the dean, the chairman of the appropriate department, and the researcher who has been charged. In the event the committee finds there has been misconduct or fraud, the dean will inform the researcher, who will have the right to appeal such a finding to the Provost of the University. In the absence of such an appeal, the dean will initiate disciplinary or legal action where required. The researcher will also have the right to appeal such action to the Provost of the University. Notification will be sent to the funding research agencies, journals, and societies to which erroneous, inaccurate, or fraudulent papers or abstracts have been submitted, to past and present collaborating investigators, and other institutions and research agencies with which the individual was previously affiliated.

In the event that the committee should find that an individual or individuals have made charges against a researcher for malicious reasons, or were otherwise not acting in good faith in making such charge, the dean will take appropriate action.

Sanctions may be imposed upon a faculty member by administrative action; if the faculty member feels such penalty to be unjust, he or she has access to the grievance machinery of the Faculty Affairs Committee of the Senate and may request mediation. No penalty involving dismissal from the University or other serious sanction can be made effective except in accordance with the provisions of the University's Code of Academic Freedom and Tenure.