You are the person in your university responsible for receiving allegations of research misconduct and any other concerns about research conducted under the auspices of the university.

You are approached by the Chair of the Postgraduate Research Committee for the Department of Chemistry with regard to a research student based in one of the laboratories and whose studentship was funded by a large charitable organisation.

The student recently submitted their thesis, and prior to the oral examination, one of the nominated examiners noticed some discrepancies in the results of an experiment that was undertaken and written up in the thesis. She raised it with the supervisor, who undertook some quiet investigative work and ascertained that it was ‘very likely’ that the results had been altered. The supervisor raised the concerns with the student at a one-to-one meeting and has reported that the student broke down in tears and admitted that they had changed the results.

However, when an additional meeting was held to discuss this further, the student denied all wrong-doing, and indicated that they had been coerced into admitting it, had received inadequate supervision throughout their degree and that the supervisor was now ‘covering his back’.

The oral examination is due to take place within two weeks. The student already has a job working in the Research and Development section of a borough council.

Questions:

  • What would you do?

  • How would you evaluate the supervision relationship of the case?

  • How might the matter be resolved?


https://ukrio.org/publications/case-study-packs/



Last modified: Tuesday, 12 March 2019, 2:05 PM