Policy on Academic Integrity in Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity

Preamble

All academic activity is built on a foundation of trust. Each member of the University community involved in the learning process – whether in research, scholarship, creative activity, or teaching – must be able to trust that all results reported are honestly attained and that the source of ideas will be appropriately acknowledged.

The purpose of this policy is:

1. to provide guidelines for academic integrity in research and scholarship and creative activity; and
2. to establish formal procedures for investigation of possible misconduct.

1.0 Guiding Principles

1.1 All members of the University community who engage in research are expected to comply with this policy by exhibiting and maintaining the highest ethical standards of scholarly conduct.

* disciplinary procedures related to student offences covered under the regulations concerning academic integrity outlined in the General Calendar are excluded from this policy.

1.2 Different disciplines, research styles, cultures and personalities reflect a diversity of perspectives in research, scholarship and creative activity.

1.3 Individual and institutional integrity are inextricably linked.

1.4 Investigators have a stake in contributing to the ethical standards of scholarly conduct and are expected to assume responsibility for all aspects of the intellectual quality of their work by:

* recognizing and acknowledging substantive contributions from others;

* obtaining permission of the author(s) before using information or concepts obtained through access to confidential manuscripts;

* using scholarly rigour and integrity in obtaining, recording and analysing data and in reporting results;

* ensuring that authorship includes those, and only those, who have contributed substantively; and

* maintaining integrity in the use of research funds.

1.5 Brandon University encourages the pursuit of all forms of learning within a framework of academic freedom strengthened by the highest professional integrity. The University assumes responsibility for:

* promoting integrity in research, scholarship and creative activity;

* developing procedures for adequate disposition, storage and retrieval of original data;

* investigating allegations of misconduct in research scholarship and creative activity;

* imposing appropriate sanctions in accordance with policy; and when appropriate,

* informing research councils of formal investigations, conclusions reached, and actions taken.

1.6 Investigation of alleged misconduct and the imposition of sanctions must be fair to all participants and should encompass: principles of natural justice, with particular attention to due process; the need for fair, prompt, judicious action; respect for issues of privacy, confidentiality and conflict of interest; protection for all complainants and respondents; and an appropriate balance between upholding principles of confidentiality and anonymity with the need for factual evidence.

1.7 Standards for distance delivery must be equivalent to those required in traditional courses.

2.0 DEFINITIONS

For the purposes of this policy, the following definitions will apply:

2.1 Academic Integrity: condition in which a scholar has an obligation to participate in the accumulation and dissemination of knowledge by adherence to accepted standards of scholarly and creative activity so that the University’s general and specific missions are fulfilled with honesty and excellence.

2.2 Allegation: information in any format relating to possible misconduct in scholarly activity.

2.3 Complainant: a person or group of persons who allege(s) misconduct by another or by others.

2.4 Complaint: a written charge of misconduct.

2.5 Conflict of Scholarly Interest: failure to declare a material conflict of interest (a) to those who sponsor or commission work, or (b) when asked to undertake reviews of grant applications or manuscripts for publication, or (c) when asked to test products for sale or distribution to the public, or (d) to a company that contracts with the University to undertake research.

2.6 Faculty/School: any unit in which scholarly activity takes place, whether a teaching unit or not.

2.7 Falsification: invention or forging of research data or citations; deceptively selective reporting, including the falsification of results through the purposeful omission of conflicting data, including, the alteration, selective omission or misrepresentation of research data or citations.

2.8 Fraud: fabrication, falsification or plagiarism. Fraud does not include factors

intrinsic to the process of academic research, such as honest error, conflicting data or differences in interpretation, or judgement of data or experimental design.

2.9 Gross Misconduct: deliberate or reckless misconduct which goes beyond negligence and is of sufficient gravity to justify initiation of dismissal proceedings.

2.10 Inquiry: the informal process of gathering information for the sole purpose of determining whether or not a complaint warrants investigation.

2.11 Investigation: the more formal procedure followed once an inquiry has concluded that a complaint has sufficient foundation to warrant examination and evaluation of relevant facts to determine whether or not a complaint is substantiated.

2.12 Misappropriation of Others’ Ideas: any unauthorized use of work submitted for the purpose of peer review or for academic evaluation.

2.13 Misconduct: practices that deviate from those commonly accepted within scholarly communities. Misconduct includes plagiarism, fabrication, or falsification of research data, conflict of scholarly interest including suppression of the work of another scholar, or improper negative review of a research grant by another scholar. An honest difference of opinion or an honest error of judgement does not constitute misconduct.

2.14 Plagiarism: representation of another person’s thoughts, writing/creative work, or inventions as one’s own.

2.15 Publication: any book, journal article, technical or other report, or research paper, whether in print, typescript, manuscript, or tape, electronic or magnetic form.

2.16 Respondent: a person or group of persons who respond(s) to a complaint of misconduct.

2.17 Scholarly Activity: all activities, such as teaching, scholarship, research, or other creative/professional activities, that are appropriate for inclusion in a Curriculum Vitae or in an Annual Report.

3.0 GUIDELINES FOR INTEGRITY IN SCHOLARSHIP, RESEARCH AND CREATIVE ACTIVITY.

3.1 Guidelines on research shall be adhered to generally and guidelines of all funding agencies shall be adhered to specifically.

3.2 Responsibility for ethical research practice lies with the principal researcher, while others involved in the research activities share ethical obligation and full responsibility for their own actions.

3.3 All proposed projects that involve humans and animals must be submitted to the appropriate Committee for ethical review.

3.4 In planning any research activity dealing with human subjects, the researcher must be aware of and responsive to all pertinent ethical principles and ensure that the research problem, design, and execution are in full compliance with them.

3.5 In research with human subjects, participation must be voluntary. Researchers are responsible for the subjects’ welfare throughout the experiment, and they must all

take reasonable precautions to avoid causing injurious psychological, physical, or social effects on their subjects.

3.6 All research subjects must be informed of the purpose of the study except where withholding information is essential to the investigation. In such research, the member must be responsible for offering the benefits of corrective action as soon as possible following completion of the research.

3.7 In research with animal subjects, researchers must comply with the regulations of the Canadian Council on Animal Care.

3.8 When reporting research results, explicit mention must be made of all variables and conditions known to the investigator that might affect the outcome of the investigation or the interpretation of the data.

3.9 The faculty member must be responsible for conducting and reporting investigations in a manner that minimizes the possibility that results will be misleading.

(a) The faculty member has an obligation to make available sufficient original research data or detailed methodologies to qualified others who may wish to replicate the study.

(b) Faculty members must retain all original data, instruments, and material products relating to scholarly activity for a reasonable period of time (as defined by the university) following publication or presentation.

3.10 Members must not destroy original data or material products for the purpose of thwarting an actual or impending inquiry or investigation.

3.11 When conducting and reporting research, the faculty member must be familiar with and give recognition to previous work on the topic, as well as to observe all copyright laws and follow the principles of giving full credit to all to whom credit is due, including students.

3.12 The faculty member must give appropriate credit through joint authorship, acknowledgement, footnote statements, or other appropriate means to those who have contributed significantly to the research and/or publication, in accordance with such contributions.

3.13 Each person named as an author shall have made a significant contribution to the work, shall have approved the final form of the work to the extent individual expertise allows, and shall share in responsibility for the work as published or presented. There shall always be at least one author who takes responsibility for the entire work.

3.14 Ethical practice requires that authors not submit the same manuscript or one essentially similar in content for simultaneous publication by two or more publications. In addition, manuscripts published in whole or in substantial part in another journal or published work should not be submitted for publication without acknowledgement and permission from the previous publication.

3.15 Members must reveal any material conflict of interest to the sponsors or to those who commission work or when asked to undertake reviews of research grant applications or manuscripts for publication, or to test products for sale or distribution to the public (c.f. 2.5).

3.16 Members must reveal to the University any financial interest in a company that contracts with the University to undertake research, particularly research involving the company’s products. Financial interest includes ownership, substantial stock holding, a directorship, significant honoraria or consulting fees (but does not include minor stock holding in a large publicly traded company); or other conduct defined as a form of research misconduct by the Ethics Committee (c.f. 2.5).

4.0 REPORTING ALLEGATIONS

4.1 Complainants have the opportunity and right for all allegations of misconduct in scholarship, creative activity, and research to be presented informally to the

relevant Dean or Unit Head for informal resolution. The Dean will inform the respondent that an allegation of misconduct has been made.

4.2 If resolution does not occur, allegations shall be presented in writing, with docu-mented evidence, signed, and dated to the relevant Dean or Unit Head. If the Dean or Unit Head is named as a respondent, the written allegations shall be directed to the Vice-President (Academic & Research) who will ensure that these procedures are followed. If a Vice-President is named as respondent, the written allegations should be directed to the President. If the President is named as respondent, the written allegations should be directed to the Board of Governors.

4.3 Within 10 working days of receipt of the allegation, the Dean or Unit Head shall advise the complainant and the respondent whether or not a formal investigation is warranted. If the complainant is dissatisfied with the decisions, he/she has the right of appeal to the Vice-President (Academic & Research).

4.4 If the Dean or Unit Head finds that a formal investigation is warranted, he/she shall provide written notice to the respondent, BUFA, Vice-President (Academic & Research), and complainant that an investigation is to be initiated. The written notice shall include a copy of the signed allegations and shall inform all parties of the procedures.

4.5 The Vice-President (Academic & Research) shall inform relevant funding agencies that an allegation has been made.

5.0 GUIDELINES FOR THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION

5.1 If the Dean or Unit Head finds that a formal investigation is warranted, an Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry shall be struck composed of one member appointed by the Union from among Brandon University’s Associate Professors and Professors (or equivalent rank), one member appointed by the Chair of Senate from among the representatives for Associate Professors and Professors elected to the Senate, and a chairperson selected, invited, and appointed by the first two from another Canadian university.

5.2 The Brandon University members of the Panel shall be appointed within 10 working days of the above written notice from the Dean or Unit Head. Neither of these members may be drawn from the same department nor from the department of the respondent.

5.3 The Chairperson chosen should be a faculty member at another Canadian university actively teaching and/or doing research in the same discipline as the respondent.

5.4 If the two Brandon University members of the Panel cannot agree upon a chairperson within 10 working days, he/she shall be chosen by the Executive Committee of Senate in consultation with the Union.

5.5 The Panel of Inquiry shall begin its work within ten working days of the chairperson accepting appointment.

5.6 Brandon University will reimburse the members of the Panel for expenses in accordance with the University’s normal policies and practice.

5.7 The Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry shall establish its own procedures, taking into account both the principles outlined in (Introduction 1.6) above and the procedures set out for arbitration boards in the Manitoba Labour Relations Act.

5.8 In establishing its procedures, the Panel shall pay especial attention to all issues of privacy and confidentiality (1.6) and, if the complaint being investigated relates to research involving human subjects, the Panel shall take whatever steps are necessary to protect the identity of the persons who participated.

5.9 The Panel may call upon the regular secretarial staff of the University to send out notices of meetings and to type letters, minutes, etc. However, no transcription services will be provided.

6.0 OUTCOMES OF THE INVESTIGATION

6.1 The Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry shall determine that the complaint falls into one of three categories.

a. The complaint is unwarranted and should be dismissed.

b. The complaint is substantiated and can be dealt with by disciplinary procedures available to the Dean.

c. The complaint is substantiated and the Ad Hoc Panel of Inquiry finds that gross misconduct was practised by the respondent.

6.2 If the disposition of the Ad Hoc Panel of Inquiry is (6.1.a), the Dean/Unit Head of the appropriate Faculty/School shall notify immediately, in writing, the respondent, the complainant, the Union, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) and the President, of the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry’s findings.

6.3 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.a) the Dean shall ensure that all documentation related to the investigation, and in the hands of the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry, is destroyed. The Dean shall also ensure that the respondent is provided access to her/his personnel file to remove any related materials (Collective Agreement).

6.4 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.a) the Dean, the Union, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) and the President shall take, in consultation with the respondent, reasonable steps to repair any damage that the respondent’s reputation for scholarly integrity may have suffered.

6.5 If the result from the investigation is (6.l.a) the Vice-President (Academic & Research) shall notify, within 5 working days, any granting agency previously advised of the investigation, as to the outcome of the investigation.

6.6 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.b), the Dean shall notify immediately, in writing, the respondent, the complainant, the Union, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) and the President, of the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry’s findings.

This notification shall acknowledge that the decision by the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry may be submitted to arbitration and that the respondent or the Union has 15 working days to file a grievance or ask for arbitration (following the provisions of the Collective Agreement Article 18.9.f).

6.7 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.b), the Dean shall notify in writing, within 10 working days of receipt of the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry’s decision, the respondent, the Union, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) and the President, of the nature of the disciplinary sanction(s) to be imposed.

6.8 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.b) the Vice-President (Academic & Research) shall notify, within 5 working days, any granting agency previously advised of the investigation, as to the outcome of the investigation. That notification shall also advise the granting agency regarding the possibility of arbitration.

6.9 If the decision is sent to arbitration, and if arbitration finds in favor of the respondent, numbers 6.3 & 6.4 (above) shall be invoked.

6.10 If the decision is sent to arbitration, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) shall notify, within 5 working days of receipt of the arbitrators’ decision, any granting agency, previously notified, of the outcome of the arbitration.

6.11 If the result from the investigation is (6.l.c), the Dean shall notify immediately, in writing, the respondent, the Union, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) and the President, of the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry’s findings. This notification shall acknowledge that the decision by the Ad-Hoc Panel of Inquiry may be submitted to arbitration and that the respondent has 15 working days to ask for arbitration (following the provisions of the Collective Agreement).

6.12 If the result of the investigation is (6.l.c), the President shall notify in writing, within 10 working days of receipt of the Ad Hoc Panel of Inquiry’s decision, the respondent, the Union, the Dean of the Faculty/School, and the Vice-President (Academic & Research) that the respondent is subject to the provisions in the Collective Agreement.

6.13 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.c), the Vice-President (Academic & Research) shall notify, within 5 working days, any granting agency previously advised of the investigation, as to the outcome of the investigation. The granting agency(ies) shall be advised of the possibility of arbitration.

6.14 If the decision is sent to arbitration, and if arbitration finds in favor of the respondent, numbers 6.3 & 6.4 (above) shall be invoked.

6.15 If the decision is sent to arbitration, the Vice-President (Academic & Research) shall notify, within 5 working days of receipt of the arbitrators’ decision, any granting agency, previously notified, of the outcome of the arbitration.

6.16 If the result from the investigation is (6.1.a), the University and the Union (in the case of a complainant member) will take appropriate disciplinary action should it be found that those who make allegations of misconduct acted in a malicious or capricious manner.

6.17 Conflict of interest should be dealt with according to Brandon University guidelines.

Approved by Senate June 13, 1995

Approved by the Board of Governors June 15, 1995