Research & Enterprise Services (RES)
(nno5)
UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE
Policy and Procedures in the event of Academic Fraud (Old)
The University requires all members of staff to maintain high standards of academic conduct
and, in particular, to be aware of the seriousness of academic fraud, and alert to the need to
avoid conduct amounting to academic fraud, whether by the fabrication of research results,
plagiarism or otherwise. It is part of the University's mission to foster a research environment
that deals forthrightly with possible fraud, and the University regards such conduct as a
serious disciplinary matter.
Academic fraud will normally involve at least one of the following:
The Fabrication or falsification of Research Results
The fabrication of research results includes: claims, which cannot reasonably be justified, to
have obtained specific or general results; false claims in relation to experiments, interviews,
procedures or any other research activity; and the omission of statements in relation to data,
results, experiments, interviews or procedures, where such omission cannot reasonably be
justified.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the unacknowledged use of another person's ideas, words or work. At one
extreme, plagiarism is simply a form of cheating, such as the slavish copying of the work of
another. At the other extreme, plagiarism may occur accidentally, through poor standards of
scholarship, or may be insignificant in qualitative terms.
Members of staff, especially those at the beginning of their research careers, are sometimes
unclear as to what use may be made of the work of others in the field without raising
concerns over plagiarism. Any member of staff who is in doubt on this mater should consult
his or her Head of Department or the principal investigator on the project in question. In most
cases, the adoption of appropriate standards of scholarship will avoid any such concerns.
Academic fraud does not encompass honest error or honest differences in interpretations or
judgements of data, but colleagues are expected to ensure that such disagreements are
kept within the bounds of normal civilised academic discourse. Personal abuse, and in
particular malicious attempts to undermine the academic reputation of colleagues either at
this university or elsewhere have no part in academic life, and may, in extreme cases, also
constitute serious academic misconduct.
Complaints about academic misconduct can arise from external communication or from
another member of staff. In all cases, such complaints must be forwarded by the recipient to
the Vice-chancellor, who will appoint an investigative panel, as described below, wherever
he believes the allegations made are sufficiently serious to merit detailed scrutiny. Where the
allegations arise from another member of staff, the University will ensure that provided such
individuals co-operate fully in the ensuing investigation, and that their information is
conveyed in good faith, they will be protected against retaliation. However, if the informant
requests anonymity, the University will endeavour as far as possible to honour that request
during the initial assessment process, but cannot guarantee anonymity during the formal
panel process.
Policy Approved: --/--/----, Policy updated: --/--/----
Research & Enterprise Services (RES)
(nno5)
Accusations of academic misconduct or fraud are made only rarely, but are always
extremely damaging, particularly if no effective defence can be offered. The most effective
defence is to keep contemporaneous records of all data derived from all experiments carried
out, with the date on which the data were acquired clearly marked. Guidelines for acquiring
and keeping data are given in Annex 1, and these are strongly commended to all
researchers.
Allegations about academic fraud may also concern those who have acquired research
degrees from the university and subsequently left. The University treats these cases
differently, as indicated below.
PROCEDURE ON ALLEGATIONS OF ACADEMIC FRAUD RELATING TO MEMBERS OF
THE ACADEMIC STAFF
1. Where it appears to the Vice-Chancellor that a member of the academic staff may
have engaged in conduct amounting to plagiarism. the fabrication of research results
or other academic fraud in relation to a research paper or other work published or to
be published, he shall appoint a committee comprising a Pro-Vice-Chancellor, the
Registrar, the Dean of the Faculty in which the relevant member of staff ('the
individual concerned') works and two members of staff who shall not be members of
the same department as the individual concerned.
2. The committee shall investigate and report on the matter. It shall, at its first meeting,
select a chairman and a member ('the presenting member') whose function it shall be
to assemble, assess and present to the committee evidence which appears to show
that the individual concerned has engaged in conduct amounting to academic fraud.
3. This presentation shall be made in writing and be made available to the individual
concerned not less than fourteen days before the first meeting of the committee at
which evidence is to be heard. The individual concerned shall be required to attend
all meetings of the committee at which evidence is to be heard. He or she shall be
entitled to be accompanied by a friend or representative.
4. The presenting member shall not supplement or explain the written presentation
except at a meeting to which the individual concerned has been required to attend.
5. All proceedings except the committee's deliberations on the evidence shall be
conducted in the presence of the individual concerned, unless, having been required
to attend, the individual concerned fails to do so.
6. The committee shall hear representations from or on behalf of the individual
concerned. The individual concerned shall be given an opportunity to reply, in writing
and orally and either directly or through his/her representative, to the written
presentation and to all subsequent evidence presented in his/her presence to the
committee.
7. The presenting member and the individual concerned or his/her representative shall
be entitled to call witnesses. Witnesses may be questioned by any committee
member and by or on behalf of the individual concerned. Witnesses should not be
permitted to remain after they have given evidence to the committee.
8. The presenting member shall not take part in the committee's deliberations on its
report and recommendation.
9. The quorum for committee meetings shall be the presenting member and three other
members of the committee. The committee shall have the right to adjourn its
meetings from time to time. No committee member shall be entitled to vote in favour
of a proposal adverse to the interests of the individual concerned unless present
throughout all meetings of the committee.
10. The committee's report to the Vice-Chancellor shall state whether or not the
committee is satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the individual concerned had
engaged in conduct amounting to plagiarism, the fabrication of research results or
Policy Approved: --/--/----, Policy updated: --/--/----
Research & Enterprise Services (RES)
(nno5)
other academic fraud in relation to a research paper or other work published or to be
published. The committee shall not make a report adverse to the individual
concerned unless at least three members of the committee vote in favour of such a
report being made.
11. The committee shall make a recommendation as to what action should be taken as a
result of its findings. The committee shall, in particular, recommend whether or not
the University should instigate the procedure under Statute 62. No recommendation
shall be made which is not supported by at least three members of the committee.
12. The committee's report and recommendations shall be communicated to the
individual concerned before being sent to the Vice-Chancellor; the individual
concerned shall be given an opportunity to submit written comments on the report
and recommendation. All such comments shall accompany the report and
recommendations when these are sent to the Vice-Chancellor.
13. The Vice-Chancellor shall determine what action shall be taken on the committee's
report. Where a procedure under Statute 62 is instigated in relation to the conduct
examined by the committee, no member of the committee shall take part in that
procedure.
14. All University staff involved in the committee's investigation shall have an obligation
of confidentiality so as to limit the knowledge of the proceedings to those who need
to know.
Senate Minutes 223-229, 1991/92
Council Minute 195, 1991/92
INITIAL PROCEDURE RELATING TO ALLEGATIONS OF ACADEMIC FRAUD
AFFECTING A DEGREE OR OTHER DISTINCTION CONFERRED BY THE UNIVERSITY
Where a proposal is received by the Vice Chancellor under Statute 31 to revoke a degree or
other distinction conferred by the University, the Vice Chancellor shall appoint a committee
comprising the Registrar, a Pro Vice Chancellor and the Dean of the Faculty in which the
holder was registered. It shall be the function of the committee to determine whether there
are reasonable grounds to suspect that the degree or distinction was obtained by or as a
result of fraud on the part of the holder, whether by cheating in examinations, the fabrication
of research results, plagiarism or otherwise.
The Committee shall require the person making the proposal to submit to it a detailed written
substantiation of the alleged fraud. The Committee shall not take evidence from any other
person. All University staff involved in the investigation shall have an obligation of
confidentiality so as to limit the knowledge of the allegation and the investigation to those
who need to know. The Committee shall not inform the holder of the degree or distinction
that an allegation has been made or that an investigation is in progress.
If the Committee, having considered the detailed proposal, finds that there are no
reasonable grounds to suspect that a degree or other distinction by or as a result of fraud on
the part of the holder, it shall so inform the Vice Chancellor. The Vice Chancellor shall inform
the person making the proposal that no further action shall be taken on the matter in the
absence of further relevant evidence.
If the Committee, having considered the detailed proposal, either (1) finds that there are
reasonable grounds to suspect that a degree or other distinction of the University has been
obtained by or as a result of fraud on the part of the holder; or (2) is unable to determine
whether or not there are such reasonable grounds, then it shall so inform the Vice
Chancellor, who shall bring the matter to Senate under Statute 31. No member of the
Policy Approved: --/--/----, Policy updated: --/--/----
Research & Enterprise Services (RES)
(nno5)
Committee shall serve on any Committee constituted under Statute 31 in relation to the
proposal in question.
PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR A COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED UNDER STATUTE 31.
1. A Committee appointed by Senate under Statute 31 shall, at its first meeting, select a
chairman and a member ("the presenting member") whose function it shall be to
assemble, assess and present to the Committee evidence which appears to show
that the degree or distinction in question was obtained by or as a result of fraud on
the part of the holder.
2. This presentation shall be made in writing and be made available to the holder of the
degree or distinction in question ("the holder") not less than fourteen days before the
first meeting of the Committee at which evidence is to be heard.
3. The presenting member shall not supplement or explain the written presentation
except at a meeting to which the holder or his/her nominee has been invited to
attend.
4. Where the holder or his/her nominee does so attend, all proceedings except the
Committee's deliberations on the evidence shall be conducted in his/her presence.
5. The presenting member of the holder or his/her nominee shall be entitled to call
witnesses. Witnesses may be questioned by any Committee member and by or on
behalf of the holder. Witnesses should not be permitted to remain after they have
given evidence to the Committee.
6. The holder shall be given an opportunity to reply, in writing and orally, to the written
presentation and to all subsequent evidence presented to the Committee.
7. The presenting member shall not take part in the Committee's deliberations on its
report and recommendation.
8. The quorum for Committee meetings shall be the presenting member and three other
members of the Committee. The Committee shall have the right to adjourn its
meetings from time to time. No Committee member shall be entitled to vote in favour
of a proposal to revoke a degree or distinction unless present throughout all meetings
of the Committee.
9. All University staff involved in the Committee's investigation shall have an obligation
of confidentiality so as to limit the knowledge of the proceedings to those who need
to know.
ANNEX 1
The Retention of Research Data
The retention of accurate and contemporaneous records of primary experimental data and
results is of the utmost importance for the progress of academic enquiry. These records
must be maintained in a form that will provide clear and unambiguous answers to questions
concerning the validity of the data or the conduct of the work that might arise at a later date.
Such questions can arise during the course of subsequent investigations by the original
researcher, his or her colleagues, and others; accurate contemporaneous records are
invaluable when this happens. In addition, errors detected following publication of
experimental or other research results could be mistaken for misconduct if the researcher
cannot provide an accurate record of the primary data. It is important that both the work and
the researcher should be protected from such misunderstanding.
The following guidelines will assist in this regard.
1. Records of primary experimental data and results should always be made using
indelible materials. Pencils or other easily erasable materials must not be used.
Policy Approved: --/--/----, Policy updated: --/--/----
Research & Enterprise Services (RES)
(nno5)
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Where primary research data and results are recorded on audio or video tape (eg
interviews), the tape housing should be labelled as set out in paragraph 4.
Complete and accurate records of experimental data and results should be made on
the day they are obtained and the date should be indicated clearly in the record.
When possible, records should be made in a hard-backed, bound notebook in which
the pages have been numbered consecutively.
Pages should never be removed from notebooks containing records of research
data. If any alterations are made to records at a later data they should be noted
clearly as such and the date of the alteration should be indicated.
Machine printouts, photographs, tapes and other such records should always be
labelled with the date and with an identifying reference number. This reference
number should be cleared recorded in the notebook referred to above, along with
other relevant details, on the day the record is obtained. If possible, printouts,
photographs, tapes and other such records should be affixed to the notebook. When
this is not possible (eg for reasons of size or bulk), such records should be
maintained in a secure location in the University for future reference. When a "hard
copy" of computer-generated primary data is not practicable, the data should be
maintained in two separate locations within the University, on disk, tape or other
format.
When photographs and other such records have been affixed to the notebook, their
removal at a later date for the purpose of preparing copies or figures for a thesis or
other publication should be avoided. If likely to be needed, two copies of such
records should be made on the day the record is generated. If this is not practicable,
then the reason for removing the original copy and the date on which this is done
should be recorded in the notebook, together with a replacement copy or the original
if this can be re-affixed to the notebook.
Custody of all original records of primary research data must be retained by the
principal investigator, who will normally be the supervisor of the research group,
laboratory or other forum in which the research is conducted. An investigator may
make copies of the primary records for his or her own use, but the original records
should not be removed from the custody of the principal investigator. The principal
investigator is responsible for the preservation of these records for as long as there is
any reasonable need to refer to them, and in any event for a minimum period of ten
years.
Policy Approved: --/--/----, Policy updated: --/--/----