Dealing with academic misconduct
Table of contents
Background, purpose and scope of application
Responsible conduct of research is one of the key ethical values in academic research and teaching.
The University of Jyväskylä is committed to following the guidelines for the responsible conduct of research of the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity TENK. The guidelines also apply to teaching and studying when applicable.
The purpose of these ethical guidelines is to support and guide the JYU community members who participate in teaching and research activities in complying with the Universities Act, the guidelines of the Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity (TENK), and the ethical principles and guidelines of the University of Jyväskylä during the implementation of the basic duties stipulated in the Universities Act.
These guidelines are applied to all students who pursue studies at the University of Jyväskylä and to all completed study units, including theses and doctoral dissertations.
The guidelines include instructions for handling misconduct allegations and their consequences as well as the duties of faculties, teachers, and students in order to prevent and process academic misconduct cases.
Laws and other regulations governing studies
Section 2 of the Universities Act requires that “the universities shall arrange their activities so as to ensure a high international standard in research, artistic activities, education and tuition in conformity with research integrity.”
The Finnish Advisory Board on Research Integrity (TENK), established upon a decree of the Ministry of Education, monitors the responsible conduct of research in Finland. TENK’s guidelines Responsible conduct of research and procedures for handling allegations of misconduct in Finland must be followed in all research and teaching activities at the University of Jyväskylä.
The University Board has established the Ethical Principles of the University of Jyväskylä, which must be followed in addition to the above-mentioned regulations.
Responsibilities of parties to prevent academic misconduct
The faculty councils are responsible for ensuring that the curricula of all degree levels include the following:
-
principles of the responsible conduct of research, including correct referencing techniques,
-
copyright basics,
-
sufficient data acquisition and management skills.
The teacher is responsible for the following:
-
familiarising themselves with the principles of the responsible conduct of research as well as other guidelines and legislation regarding ethical issues and following the current debate on, for example, the ethical use of artificial intelligence in studies,
-
guiding the student in accordance with the curriculum:
-
in the ethical principles and practices of studying and research,
-
in the practices of academic writing, including referencing techniques, starting from the first written assignment,
-
ensuring the student is aware of the importance of the responsible conduct of research, the harmfulness of misconduct for the whole science community, and the consequences of misconduct,
-
ensuring that the assignments are clear and guiding the student to take into account ethical principles and practices,
-
recognising academic misconduct and misconduct attempts and intervening immediately when detecting it.
The student is responsible for the following:
-
actively studying, adopting, and observing ethical guidelines and practices as well as other guidelines and practices related to studying and research,
-
taking the initiative to clarify matters with their teacher or supervisor when they are unsure about what is ethically acceptable and what is not.
Academic misconduct related to studies
Misconduct is a dishonest act or omission designed to give a false impression of your own or another person’s competence.
Examples of different forms of misconduct are listed below. Definitions for other than exam cheating are based on the definitions of the Finnish National Board on Research Integrity. The unethical use of artificial intelligence, such as applications based on large language models, can be related to different subsections depending on the situation.
Cheating on an exam
Cheating on an exam refers to relying on means or tools that are forbidden in an exam. Examples of cheating on an exam include copying, discussing the exam with others and taking an exam on behalf of another person.
Plagiarism
Plagiarism, according to the definition of TENK, means unauthorised borrowing, that is, using the work or research ideas of others without permission or reference. This also infringes on the rights of the original authors to their own scientific work. Plagiarism includes both direct and rephrased copying. Plagiarism is, for example, someone presenting or using another person’s text or part thereof, research plan, manuscript, article, research result, materials, ideas, observations, or program code, translation, diagram, picture or other visual expression as their own without appropriate references.
Plagiarism includes both direct and rephrased copying.
Plagiarism means also someone copying source references from other people to expand their own source base.
Self-plagiarism
Self-plagiarism means publishing the same results several times as seemingly new, such as recycling your own work during new study units without citing them properly. In this case, the author does not try to present the work of another person as their own but reuses their own previous academic materials without mentioning it. If a student reuses their earlier work, they must cite it in addition to the original sources.
Fabrication
Fabrication refers to reporting invented observations or results to the research community. Fabrication in studies may include, for example, intentionally presenting a false conclusion as a correct one.
Falsification (misrepresentation)
Falsification (misrepresentation) refers to modifying and presenting original observations deliberately so that the results based on those observations are distorted. Fabrication and falsification are forms of misconduct that may take place, for example, in the investigation and research work included in the studies.
Misappropriation
Misappropriation refers to someone’s unauthorised presentation of another person’s results or data as their own. Misappropriation may occur, for example, during group work.
Procedures for alleged misconduct
-
Every teacher, staff member and student is obliged to inform the dean of the faculty or the director of the independent institute of any academic misconduct they have detected.
-
All misconduct allegations are processed without delay and the student is offered an opportunity to be heard in compliance with section 34 of the Administrative Procedure Act 434/2003. The process is documented.
-
The hearing process takes place principally in writing.
-
Sufficient and timely information is provided to the parties in different stages of the process in accordance with the preparation process described in these instructions and the communications responsibilities agreed within the units.
-
Decisions with their attachments made by the dean or the director of the independent institute are filed in the JYU archives, as they are public documents. Decisions must be drawn up in such a way that they do not contain confidential information.
-
A teacher or other staff member who suspects misconduct does not participate in the decision-making.
-
Decisions made during the handling of an allegation (decision starting and ending the process) are recorded statistically.
-
The teacher or other staff member who has discovered a misconduct issue does not participate in the handling of the matter.
-
If, in the course of the investigation of alleged misconduct, there is reason to suspect that a student has used material produced by another student with the consent and knowledge of the latter, the case will also be investigated as alleged misconduct in respect of the other student.
-
The administrative language of the University of Jyväskylä is Finnish. Official documentation is always provided in Finnish and, when necessary, the student receives an unofficial translation of the documents principally in English.
-
Process: Forms, procedures and consequences of academic misconduct
Plagiarism detection software
The University uses plagiarism detection software. The software must be used to check all the theses (bachelor’s, advanced studies, licentiate theses and doctoral dissertations).
The University of Jyväskylä recommends that teachers use the plagiarism detection software as comprehensively as possible for other assignments related to studies as well.
The teacher who has been the supervisor of the thesis or dissertation is responsible for conducting the check and the interpretation of results. Teachers must take into account that the software does not detect all plagiarised text.
Consequences of misconduct and the student’s legal protection
Consequences of proven academic misconduct and follow-up
Hearing of a student
In a written consultation, implemented in compliance with Section 34 of the Administrative Procedure Act 434/2003, the student is provided an opportunity to submit their response to the issues raised. The matter can be solved without the student’s response if it is not submitted within reasonable time indicated in advance.
Legal protection of students
The written decision regarding a written warning or temporary expulsion must state which factors have influenced the decision.
The decision must be submitted to the student in a verifiable way, who has the right to appeal the disciplinary decision to the administrative court.
A student whose study unit has been rejected because of alleged misconduct can make a request for rectification to the Appeals Board within 14 days from being informed of the decision if they are not satisfied with it.
A student dissatisfied with the rejection of a doctoral dissertation, licentiate thesis and a thesis that is part of advanced studies must make the rectification request to the Appeals Board of the University within 14 days of being notified of the decision.
Reporting misconduct
If an exchange student or a student from another Finnish university is proven to be guilty of academic misconduct, the home university will be notified.
The investigation of alleged misconduct and revoking the acceptance decision for already passed study units
An investigation on alleged misconduct can also be initiated after a decision of approval has already been made on the study unit if the misconduct allegation only arises at this stage.
In some cases, a decision to approve a study unit can be cancelled and made again as a corrective resolution in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act (434/2003).
The correction of a decision made to the detriment of the party concerned generally requires the consent of the party concerned.
The Administrative Procedure Act allows for the possibility to correct the decision to approve a study unit without the student’s consent only if “the decision is clearly based on erroneous or insufficient evidence” and “if the error is obvious and has arisen from the party’s own conduct” (Administrative Procedure Act, Section 50).
An initiative to correct the decision must be made within five years of the date when the decision was taken (Administrative Procedure Act, Section 52). The rectification of a factual error requires that the matter is processed again fully and that a new decision is given on the matter, including a normal appeal procedure.
If the approval decision cannot be rectified based on the Administrative Procedure Act, the approval decision can be annulled by the administrative court in compliance with section 117 of the Administrative Judicial Procedure Act (808/2019).
If the academic misconduct allegation is made only after the approval of the study unit, the procedures for handling the matter must be confirmed with the University’s Legal Services before starting an investigation.
Marja-Leena Laakso
Rector