HDR Candidature Research Misconduct Procedures
Parent Policy
HDR Candidature Research Misconduct Policy
These procedures relate to action following an allegation of research misconduct by a student engaged in research. Disciplinary procedures may operate after submission or the notification of a result, although only in relation to alleged misconduct that occurred while the candidate was pursuing the degree.
Definition of terms
Research misconduct: conduct in, or connection with, research that is dishonest, reckless or negligent; and seriously deviates from accepted standards within the scientific and scholarly community for proposing, conducting or reporting research. Without limiting this definition, and assuming that the conduct is dishonest, reckless or negligent, research misconduct includes:
a: misleading ascription of authorship, including the listing of authors without their permission, attributing work to others who have not in fact contributed to the research, and a lack of appropriate acknowledgement of work primarily produced by a research student, trainee or associate;
b: plagiarism, which for the purposes of these procedures includes the presentation of documentation, words or ideas of another person as her or his own, without attribution appropriate for the medium of presentation;
c: breach of copyright;
d: use of information in breach of any duty of confidentiality associated with the review of any manuscript or grant application;
e: omission of reference to relevant published work of others for the purposes of inferring personal discovery of new information;
f: taking or sequestering or materially damaging any research - related property of another, without authorisation, such as in relation to the apparatus, reagents, biological materials, writings, data, hardware, software or other substance or device used or produced in the conduct of research;
g: failing to obtain requisite ethics clearance before the research or a step in the research is performed; or
h: stating or presenting a falsehood including omission of a fact so that what is stated or presented represents a material or significant falsehood.
Faculty preliminary review panel
Any person who believes that he/she has information suggesting that misconduct may have occurred is required to make such allegations in writing to the chair of the Research Graduate School Committee.
Upon receipt of an allegation of misconduct against a postgraduate researcher, and after having notified the candidate in writing by certified mail of the nature of the allegation, the chair of the Research Graduate School Committee or delegate will ask the faculty to convene a preliminary review panel.
In convening the preliminary review panel, university policies regarding gender balance and avoidance of any potential conflict of interest must be maintained.
The review should also be undertaken as expeditiously and confidentially as possible
Membership of the faculty preliminary review panel should include:
-
Representative of the Research Graduate school Committee, not being the faculty representative, who shall be the convenor
-
Faculty representative on the Research Graduate School Committee or the dean’s nominee
-
Senior research member of the academic staff from a cognate discipline
-
Faculty representative with expertise in the field.
Members of the panel must have had no previous involvement with the student’s research.
There shall be no student member on the review panel.
The candidate or former candidate will be informed of the proposed membership of the preliminary review panel. The candidate may not exercise a right of veto concerning membership of the preliminary review panel.
Any change of membership due to unforeseen circumstances should be notified to the candidate before the meeting of the review panel.
The membership of the preliminary review panel shall be ratified by the research Graduate School Committee.
The candidate or former candidate shall be given the right to make a written submission or to appear before the preliminary review panel (either in person or through a representative, not being a legally qualified person).
Responsibility
Person lodging allegation
Chair Research Graduate School Committee
Candidate
Faculty preliminary review panel members
Monash Postgraduate Association
Student Rights Service
Research Graduate Discipline Committee
If the faculty preliminary review panel concludes that there is a case to answer, that matter should then be considered by a special research graduate division of the Discipline Committee, where a final decision would be made.
The faculty preliminary review panel‘s full recommendation would provide the Research Graduate Discipline Committee with the primary document on which its deliberations would be based. The student will receive a copy of the report and will similarly be invited to respond to this document.
Membership of the committee shall include:
- Deputy vice-chancellor (research) or nominee
- Two senior academics of the university with experience in research and research student supervision and
- Student representative nominated by the Monash Postgraduate Association.
Responsibility
Candidate
Research Graduate Discipline Committee members
Monash Postgraduate Association
Student Rights Service
Penalties for research misconduct
In the event that the candidate is found guilty of misconduct, the Research Graduate Discipline Committee shall impose a penalty, taking into account the severity of the misconduct. Penalties may include:
- A reprimand
- A fine not exceeding $500
- Disallowance of the work
- Suspension or exclusion
Responsibility
Research Graduate Discipline Committee
Contact Person: Policy Mrgs
|
