A. General

1. Scope

The obligations of the teacher are self-evident. They include teaching, research, and service. The assessment of these activities should be an on-going process and is the responsibility of the faculty, duly supported by the administration. These obligations will be honored at Ohio University. Whenever questions arise about the relationship between faculty and student, those concerned should consult with the appropriate chairperson or dean. Specific questions abut administrative matters should also be addressed to the chairperson or dean.

2. Change of Instructor, Time, or Place of Meeting

Change of instructor, time, or place of a meeting for a scheduled class may be made only with the approval of the department chair person or director of the school who shall report in writing all such changes to the dean and to the Registration and Scheduling Offices. 

3. Information Given Class at First Meeting

At the first meeting of the class, the instructor shall distribute a syllabus which also provides students with the following information:

1. The instructor's name, the call number, the descriptive title, and the catalog number of the course;
2. The intended learning outcomes or objectives upon successful completion of the class;
   
3. The basis for grading in the course;
4. A statement of the instructor's attendance policy (see Section IV.B.3)
   
5. A statement of the instructor's policy on academic misconduct that either refers to a policy approved by the academic unit or college or that includes the following:
    
   i.  A definition of academic misconduct if the field requires a more specific definition of academic misconduct than the one found in the Student Code of Conduct(see Section VIII.F);  
   
   ii.  A list of the range of sanctions that the instructor might implement in the case of academic misconduct; 
   
   iii.  A statement that students may appeal academic sanctions through the grade appeal process; 
   
   iv.  A statement that University Judiciaries may impose additional sanctions.
   
6. An explanation of policy relative to absences consistent with the student regulations as given in the Undergraduate Catalog and reproduced herein (see Section VIII.C).
   
   
7. In order to protect the instructor's intellectual property, it is suggested that the following statement appear in the syllabus:  "The lectures, classroom activities, and all materials associated with this class and developed by the instructor are copyrighted in the name of (instructor's name) on this date (give date)."

 

5. Class Lists and Record Books

Faculty members shall make up their class rolls solely from the class lists issued from the Registration Office. Names of students who have withdrawn from class should, upon receipt of official notice of withdrawal, be crossed off the class roll. A grade of WF or WP should be submitted in accordance with instructions accompanying the notice of withdrawal.

  5.  Office Hours for Student Conferences

Members of the faculty are expected to maintain an adequate number of office hours in accordance with a posted schedule and by appointment.

  6.  Texts

Textbooks should be ordered through the appropriate departmental procedures. Individual faculty members are not permitted to sell textbooks or text materials to students. Text materials prepared by faculty may be duplicated in accordance with applicable copyright laws by local bookstores and duplication services; and these materials may be sold only at cost or with a reasonable royalty to the faculty member(s). Royalties accrued to faculty members for these materials should be reviewed by appropriate departmental committees.

    7. Retention of Student Records

Instructors shall retain grades, tests, and assignments as well as any other material used in determining a student's grade for at least one academic quarter (and until the end of the fall quarter following spring quarter classes) unless the instructor returns the material to the student or provides an alternative policy to the class at the beginning of the quarter. Persons with grading responsibilities who leave the university should make appropriate arrangements with their department chairs or school directors on the disposition of their student records.

    8. Instructional Evaluations

Instructional evaluations contribute to faculty professional development and students' educational experiences. One vital component of this instructional assessment is anonymous student evaluation of each course. Instructors are expected to cooperate in all phases of their Colleges' instructional assessments.

    9.  Classroom Privacy

While it is sometimes desirable for classroom practices to be observed for the purpose of improvement of pedagogy, and such observation is sometimes required for annual faculty evaluation and for tenure and/or promotion evaluation, faculty are entitled to classroom privacy, academic freedom, and professional courtesy.  Consequently, observation and evaluation of any classroom (including those on-line) by any observer or evaluator requires the prior notification and mutual agreement of the class instructor and the observer or evaluator.  Furthermore, recording of classroom activities by any electronic means, by students, other faculty, university administrators, or others, requires permission of the instructor.  All students in a class must be informed if permission has been given for a class to be recorded.  Classroom lectures and associated course materials may be copyrighted by an instructor (see Section IV.A.3).  Under no circumstances may verbatim recording of copyrighted classroom lectures and materials by electronic or any other means (including note taking) be conducted for 1) sale, whether or not it is for educational benefit, or 2) for the educational benefit of those not enrolled in the class.  This does not apply to non-vebatim notes taken by students.

 

1. Instructor Absences

   The teacher is expected to meet all classes for which he/she is scheduled. Members of the faculty who must be absent from teaching responsibilities shall have the approval of the chairperson of the department and the dean of the college. If an absence can be anticipated, approval shall be obtained in advance and, where possible, arrangements made for a substitute.

2. Dropping Non-attending Students

   A student, whose name appears on the class list for a given quarter, but who has not attended the first two contact hours of class meetings and who has not notified the instructor before either hour, may be dropped from the class roll. In the case of classes scheduled for periods of two or more hours, students should, before the end of the first scheduled period, notify the instructor of their wish to remain on the roll.

   Instructors who intend to use their privilege to drop non-attending students should remain in the classroom or make themselves otherwise available throughout the first scheduled period, and accept students who notify the instructor as required above.

3. Class Attendance Policy

   The weight given to class attendance in determining a student's grade is an academic matter; therefore, all instructors are responsible for their own attendance policies. They will convey these policies to their students during the first week of classes each term. A written statement of each attendance policy will be transmitted to the appropriate department chair.(It is noted that all classes will meet for their full period on days immediately before and after vacation.). Each attendance policy must be consistent with the following guidelines:

1. The policy must not contradict the student regulations on absences as given in the Undergraduate Catalog and reproduced herein (see Section VIII.C).
2. Any limits on the number of excused absences, or on the availability of make-up work for excused absences, must be included in the policy.

Within their established attendance policies, instructors are expected to accommodate students returning to class after a legitimate (see Section VIII.C.5) absence. This accommodation may take the form of make-up work, recalculation of the student's grade based on remaining work, or other means, as specified in the policy.

 

1. Final Examinations

   The schedule of final examinations is prepared by the Scheduling Office and each faculty member receives a copy through the campus mail or by electronic mail. Deviations from this schedule can be made only with prior approval of the dean of the college and must be cleared with the Scheduling Office.

   A formal final examination, written in class, will be required in all courses where a letter grade is given unless the instructor, at his/her discretion, substitutes some other method for bringing the course into focus and for evaluating the students. In either case the instructor will continue to meet his/her class at the time the final examination is scheduled either to give the test or to receive the work which takes its place; exceptions will be made only with prior approval of the department chair person or other appropriate academic officer.

   If an instructor feels that the course objectives can be better met by some method other than the final examination, he/she will announce this plan to the class at the beginning of the quarter, and, along with his/her statement of attendance policy, inform the department chair person in writing of his/her intentions.

   Final examinations may not be given, nor final projects in lieu of an examination be required, at any time prior to the regular examination period. Students are entitled to this period for examinations and project purposes, and should be so informed. If a student is made to take an examination or submit a final project prior to the stated final examination period, he/she should appeal to the dean of his/her college.

2. Correction of Grade

   A grade reported to the Office of Student Records becomes official as soon as it is reported. A permanent grade may be changed only if an error has been made. The only exception is that if the instructor's chairperson or dean recommends a change on the basis of evidence presented during the course of a student grievance procedure, the instructor may be permitted (but is not required) to make the recommended change. (See related policy in Section IV.B.3)

   In reporting a change of grade (other than I or PR) to the Office of Student Records, the instructor must present an explanation for the grade change. Copies of the change of grade request will be sent to the instructor, his/her chairperson, and his/her dean by the Office of Student Records.

3. Grade Appeals

1. The instructor assigned to a class has full responsibility for grading, subject to the appeal process described in this section. In unusual circumstances (e.g., death, incapacity, or indefinite inaccessibility of the instructor) the departmental chairperson is responsible for the final grade, subject to appeal by the student to the dean as described in this section.
2. A student appealing a grade must make a concerted effort to resolve the matter with the instructor of the course. Failing such a resolution, the student may appeal the grade to the department chair or school director. The chair/director must attempt a resolution acceptable to both the student and the instructor but does not have the authority to change the grade. The department chair or director may enlist departmental grievance procedures to assist in resolving the grade appeal at the departmental level. If the resolution at the departmental level is unsuccessful within the quarter following submission of the grade and the student wishes to appeal, the chair/director shall forward the appeal to the dean of the college for action. If the chair/director is the instructor, the student appeals directly to the dean.
3. In cases not involving academic misconduct, the burden of proof for a grade change is on the student. If the dean concludes that the student has insufficient grounds for an appeal, there can be no further appeal by the student. If the dean concludes that sufficient grounds do exist for an appeal, the dean shall appoint a faculty committee of five members to consider the case. If a majority on the committee decide that the grade should be changed and the instructor does not accept the recommendation, the committee can authorize the Registrar to change the grade. The decision of the committee is not subject to further appeal. In appeal cases in which the dean is the instructor, the role of the dean will be assumed by the Provost. In those appeal cases involving courses taught by faculty from more than one college, the Dean of University College will review the appeal and, if necessary, appoint the appeals committee.
4. In cases of academic misconduct both the student and teacher must document their allegations and refutations in writing, including any supporting materal (e.g. copies of the student's work, copies of other materials used but not referenced in the student's work, etc.) relevant to the case.  Such written evidence will be reviewed in accordance with the grade appeal process followed by the college or unit.

1. Members of the faculty are free to assist in research or scientific studies conducted by state, regional, and national educational and professional organizations, and in outside work of a professional nature. When such participation necessitates a reduction of teaching load and/or administrative responsibility, or when the expenditure of University funds is involved, it is necessary to secure official approval from the appropriate dean.

2. All outside work of a professional nature by members of the faculty, not a part of the official duties, shall be reported to the Provost and the President by the dean concerned. Members of the faculty shall, as soon as an agreement has been made or work has started, submit to their department head, dean, and the Provost, reports on the nature and extent of outside work. If the outside employer requires the faculty member to sign a patent agreement, such agreement must have prior approval and must be worked out in accordance with the University policy on patents.
3. In no case shall outside employment interfere with specified regular University duties and the effective service of the faculty member.  To avoid a conflict of interest, an Ohio University faculty member who is providing instructional services for another institution offering graduate study may in no way provide such services to another Ohio University faculty member or administrator who is enrolled in graduate study at the same institution.  In the event that a question arises about the conflict of outside work with effective service to the University, consultation with the faculty member shall be held by his/her department chair person and the academic dean. Decision by the dean, subject to review by the Provost and by the President, shall be final on this point.
4. If a faculty or staff member serving as a consultant to an outside agency or company requires the use of University facilities and/or equipment for purposes of the consultantship, such usage shall be only on an occasional and brief basis, and only with permission of the department chair person or campus dean. Such permission shall include agreement upon any appropriate provisions for liability and/or fees. Should more extensive or frequent usage be needed, the development of a grant or contract between the agency/company and the University would be appropriate.
5. A student engaged in a project related to or part of a consultant's work should be paid by the consultant of the agency/company at a rate appropriate to the task and equivalent to the rate normally paid students for University-sponsored work.

Any member of the faculty may audit courses without fee, provided he/she has the approval of the dean of his/her college and the instructors of the courses.

All persons on full-time presidential contract, except senior administrators (vice presidents, vice provosts,associate provosts, and deans) are eligible to apply for admission to a graduate program or to nondegree status. The Associate Provost for Graduate Studies and the Graduate Council will review all applications for potential conflict of interest. If the Graduate Council determines that a conflict exists, the faculty member or administrator shall not be admitted to a graduate program. It is the responsibility of the Associate Provost for Graduate Studies to see that this review takes place at the earliest possible date.

No academic employee above the rank of Instructor, Research Assistant, or equivalent may receive from the University the Master's Degree or the Doctor's Degree in any graduate program where the faculty member has membership, teaches courses, serves on Master's or Doctoral Committees, has, or is expected to have, other supervisory responsibilities which might give rise to conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts of interest.  Faculty members or senior administrators on full-time presidential contracts at Ohio University seeking a terminal degree must enroll in academic programs outside the colleges in which they are employed.  Appeals regarding this policy follow the guidelines established in accordance with the "Faculty Grievance Committee"' procedures (see Section II.G).

A full-time faculty member or full-time administrator at Ohio University who is admitted to a degree program or to nondegree status may normally register for no more than 8 hours per quarter. A person wishing to register for 9 to 10 hours must have written approval from the graduate chairperson of his/her academic program and from the administrative supervisor for his or her employee position. Full-time faculty and full-time administrators who obtain approval to register for 9 or 10 hours per quarter may not receive a graduate stipend. Course loads taken during breaks in regular employment, however, such as summers for 9-month faculty, will be limited only by Graduate Catalog regulations. (Attention is also directed to the stipulations regardingresidency requirements as stated in the GraduateCatalog and the Policy and Procedure Manual, No. 40.016.)

If a student who is currently in a graduate degree program is offered a presidential contract appointment, the situation shall be reviewed by the Associate Provost for Graduate Studies and the Graduate Council at the earliest possible date. The Graduate Council shall determine whether conflict of interest or unfair competition would result from dual status as a student and a presidential-contract employee which might affect academic performance and evaluation. If the Graduate Council determines that such conflict would exist, they shall inform the student that he or she may not continue in his or her graduate program if he or she accepts the presidential-contract appointment.

Patentable discoveries sometimes result from research performed at Ohio University. It is the desire of the University to be as helpful as possible in protecting the patent rights of the faculty, researchers, students, and employees to the fullest extent compatible with the public interest and the rights of the University. To this end, the University has authorized the hiring of patent attorneys to file patent applications. Detailed description of University patent policies can be found in the Policy and Procedure Manual, No. 17.001.

The Faculty Senate endorses the essential principles of the "Statement on Copyright"adopted by the American Association of University Professors in 1999.

1. In the event that an academic quarter is terminated prematurely and Rule Two is invoked by the Board of Regents, an entry will be made on each student's record indicating that the quarter has been terminated and that no credit or grades could be given.

2. In the event that an academic quarter is terminated prematurely and Rule Two is not invoked by the Board of Regents, the following policies will be in effect:

a. Students with a record of non-attendance or who are delinquent in their work (missed quizzes, examinations, reports, etc.) at the discretion of their instructor may receive no credit or a failing grade for the term. Instructors shall notify such students of the reasons for receiving no credit or a failing grade.

b. The amount of credit hours and the mode of completing the course shall be recommended by the instructor and approved by his/her department or a committee thereof. The specific grade will be assigned by the instructor.

c. Policies developed in [b] above shall be placed in writing and a copy filed in the department office and in the office of the college dean, and a copy sent to each student involved. The Faculty Senate shall recommend a date by which course work should be completed and grades submitted.

3.     In the event that an academic quarter is temporarily interrupted and the full ten weeks of instruction are subsequently completed, normal grading policies will apply.

Ohio University recognizes its responsibility to serve community (local, state, national, international) interests as it fulfills its basic educational objectives of undergraduate, graduate, and professional teaching, advanced research, and public service. It also recognizes its obligation as a center of higher learning to extend and understand knowledge in order that human life and liberty be preserved and enriched, not degraded and destroyed. The rights to engage in scholarly activity, to pursue individual intellectual inquiry, and to publish and communicate are basic to these objectives and obligations of the University and its scholars. It is in this context that the University appraises its sponsored research programs and encourages and assists its faculty through the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs.

Policies

The policies of the University with respect to sponsored research are based on the following principles:

1. Any sponsored research that is to be undertaken must be demonstrably supportive of the instructional and research objectives of the departments, centers, and institutes in which the research is to be conducted.Proposals for research will be reviewed, weighing needs and benefits against costs and restrictions, to determine their acceptability.
   
   
2. The University does not accept sponsored research, the restrictions on which prevent disclosure of the sponsor, the existence of the contract, or adequate review of the appropriateness of the program to academic pursuits of the University.
   
   
3. The University, through the Vice President for Research, in concert with the principal investigator, his/her department and college, will seek to minimize restrictions on publication and scholarly communication imposed by those research contracts that are accepted.
   
   
4. The University does not accept theses or dissertations containing material developed as part of a research project if the theses or dissertations are restricted from publication. Publication, for this purpose, includes depositing the manuscript with the student's department and college, cataloging by Alden Library, and microfilming and distribution by University Microfilms.
   
   
5. The University will accept research contracts at the request of the federal government that go beyond the immediate research interests of faculty members and their departments only under the most pressing demands of national interest and welfare.
   
   
6. The University does not accept sponsored programs requiring the University to be involved directly in the development of weapons or weapons systems.
   
   
7. In accordance with federal regulations, the University requires approval for certain research projects, sponsored or unsponsored, dealing with human subjects. The object, of course, is to protect those participating in the project from psychological or physiological abuse. Such projects must be reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board for Review of Research Involving Human Subjects. For the complete policy on research involving human subjects, see the Policy and Procedure Manual, No. 19.052.

It is the policy of Ohio University to encourage educational innovation and experimentation in the use of techniques that improve instructional effectiveness and efficiency. Policies governing University-sponsored educational materials have been developed. Detailed descriptions of these policies can be found in the Policy and Procedure Manual (Nos. 15.006 and 15.007).

1. The Faculty Senate and the Provost of Ohio University have adopted a statement on Professional Ethics. (See Section I.A of the Faculty Handbook .) In Sections IV.L.2 and IV.L3 procedures for the investigation and resolution of alleged violations of Professional Ethics are specified. Section IV.L.2 applies to alleged violations of Professional Ethics not involving professional research misconduct, while section IV.L.3 applies to alleged Fraud and Misconduct in Professional Research (See Policy No. 19.048 in the Policy and Procedures Manual). Procedures for Loss of Tenure are in Section II.D.5 of the Faculty Handbook.

2. Violations of Professional Ethics not Involving Research Misconduct

1. College Professional Ethics Committee^[2]

   Each college and Regional Campus will have a standing Professional Ethics Committee consisting of six faculty members in the college or regional campus unless it is necessary to supplement the Committee by faculty from other colleges or regional campuses. At least four of the six faculty must be tenured Group I faculty. The other two may be selected from among the untenured Group I or the Group II faculty. Three of the six members of the College Professional Ethics Committee are selected by the faculty senators from that college or regional campus while the remaining three are appointed by the Dean of the College or Regional Campus. The Chair of the Committee will be appointed by the Dean from among the Group I faculty on the Committee. The term length for members on the College Professional Ethics Committee will be three years and service is restricted to two successive terms. Initial appointments will be staggered so that each year the senators from the college or regional campus and the Dean will each need to select a new Committee member. The College Professional Ethics Committee will be provided access to appropriate university resources to assist it in carrying out its investigations.

2. Departmental and College Procedures

   Cases of apparent violations of professional ethics not involving Research Misconduct should be brought to the attention of the department Chair ^[1]. The Chair, possibly in consultation with faculty colleagues or a departmental grievance/advisory committee, shall investigate the allegations. The person accused of the violation of professional ethics will be informed of the charges in a timely manner and be given an opportunity to explain his/her behavior. If the Chair is not satisfied with the explanation, the specifics of the allegations will be given to the person accused in writing. The person accused will have fifteen (15) days to respond to the Chair in writing and the Chair will attempt to resolve the problem.  If resolution cannot be reached between the Chair, the complainant, and the accused, the Chair will forward the specific allegations of violation of Professional Ethics by the faculty member, along with appropriate documentation, to the Dean in writing. The faculty member accused will be given the option of submitting his/her explanation of the alleged misconduct in writing as part of the documentation submitted to the Dean at the same time. If the Dean, Chair, the complainant, and faculty member accused of the violation cannot reach a resolution of the matter within fifteen (15) days, the specific allegations of violation of Professional Ethics along with appropriate documentation will be forwarded to the College Professional Ethics Committee. A final copy of the allegations will be given to the accused, and once the allegations are forwarded to the College Professional Ethics Committee, no additional charges can be added without beginning the process anew.

   In cases where the departmental Chair is alleged to have violated Professional Ethics, the allegations are brought to the attention of the Dean of the College who will then investigate the matter and inform the Chair of the allegations if he/she finds them sufficiently serious and credible. If the Dean is not satisfied with the explanation, the specifics of the allegations will be given to the person accused in writing. The Chair will have fifteen (15) days to respond to the Dean in writing and the Dean will attempt to resolve the problem. If resolution cannot be reached between the Dean, the complainant, and the Chair, the Dean will forward the specific allegations of violation of Professional Ethics by the Chair, along with appropriate documentation, to the College Professional Ethics Committee in writing. A final copy of allegations will be given to the Chair, and once the allegations are forwarded to the Professional Ethics Committee, no additional charges can be added without beginning the process anew.

   When charges are brought against a faculty member from some external professional or governmental agency, the case will proceed directly to the Dean and the College Professional Ethics Committee after any adverse determination is made by the external professional or governmental agency.

   When an allegation of violation of professional ethics is received by the Professional Ethics Committee of the College, the Committee Chair will inform the person accused and the Committee will carry out a thorough investigation of the charges with the assistance of university offices as needed as determined by the Dean and the Ethics Committee Chair. The accused person will be given an opportunity to meet and discuss the charges with the Committee. When appearing before the Committee, the accused person may be accompanied by an advocate, preferably a faculty member.

   After consideration of all of the testimony and evidence in the case, the Professional Ethics Committee will report its written conclusions and any recommendations to the Dean of the College and to the person accused with a copy to the Provost. The report and recommendations must be issued within thirty (30) days after receiving the written allegations. The findings and recommended action may include the following:

   Not Guilty--The Professional Ethics Committee finds that the person charged is not guilty of a violation of professional ethics. This finding ends the process.

   Reprimand--Suitable for violations of professional ethics that are moderately serious.

   Censure or Disciplinary Action--Appropriate for more serious violations of professional ethics and may include a formal Censure, reassignment of duties for some specified period of time, and/or a financial penalty not to exceed 10% of the academic year salary.

   A recommendation of Reprimand, Censure, or Disciplinary Action, requires at least four positive votes from the College Professional Ethics Committee. In these cases, the report and recommendations of the Professional Ethics Committee and the Dean's recommendation are forwarded in writing to the Provost for action within thirty (30) days after the the Dean receives the report and recommendations of the College Professional Ethics Committee. The Dean may recommend a reduced, but not more severe, penalty to the Provost, and a copy of the Dean's recommendation is given to the accused.

   The Provost, with due consideration of the recommendations of the Dean and the College Professional Ethics Committee, will announce his/her decision within thirty (30) days of receiving the recommendations and report from the College Ethics Committee and the Dean. The individual charged under this procedure can appeal the action of the Provost to the Professional Relations Committee of the Faculty Senate within twenty-one (21) days of being informed of the Provost's action. The grounds for appeal are limited to failure to follow appropriate procedures in the investigation or arbitrary and capricious decision making. The Professional Relations Committee shall submit its recommendations to the President within thirty (30) days of notification and the President will make the final determination on the appeal and allegation.

3. Fraud and Misconduct in Professional Research 

a. Purpose

To establish an administrative process for dealing with misconduct in research, or allegations thereof, so that the integrity of research conducted at Ohio University is maintained, and so that Ohio University complies with federal regulations for institutional oversight of scientific misconduct, specifically as set forth in 42CFR50 for NIH supported research, particularly 42CFR50.103(d)(13,) and 45CFR689 for NSF supported research.

b. Definitions

Misconduct in Research The term "misconduct in research,"as stated in the aforementioned regulations and for the purposes of this policy, means "fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research." It does not include honest error, or honest differences in interpretations or judgments of data.

Inquiry  The term "inquiry,"as stated in the aforementioned regulations and for the purpose of this policy, means "information gathering and initial fact finding to determine whether an allegation or apparent instance of misconduct warrants an investigation."

Investigation   The term "investigation,"as stated in the aforementioned regulations and for the purposes of this policy, means "formal examination and evaluation of all relevant facts to determine if misconduct has occurred."

Complainant  The term "complainant"means the individual who makes the allegation.

Respondent   The term "respondent"means the individual against whom the allegation has been made.

Whistleblower  The term "whistleblower"refers to a university employee who, in good faith, makes an allegation of wrong doing.

c. Policy Statement

Misconduct in research is not consistent with the principles which Ohio University follows in fulfilling its mission of teaching, research, and public service, and will not be tolerated. If allegations of such misconduct are raised, the institution shall conduct a prompt and thorough review and impose appropriate sanctions when the allegation of misconduct has been sustained. Throughout the process the institution will strive to protect due process rights of those accused and, to the maximum extent possible, the privacy of those who in good faith report apparent misconduct.

d. Implementation

Implementation of this policy shall be performed in a manner consistent with the aforementioned regulations, specifically: Allegations of fraud or misconduct in research, scholarship or creative activity will be presented to the Vice President for Research.

e. Pre-Inquiry Review

The Vice President for Research, or his/her designee, will conduct a pre-inquiry review to assist the complainant to formulate as clearly as possible the exact nature of the allegation and to determine if an allegation has any reasonable basis before beginning a formal process of review. In those cases involving allegations that pose threats to the health or welfare of human subjects or other involved persons, a pre-inquiry review may be omitted. Following an informal review with the respondent, if the Vice President or his/her designee determines that the allegation has no merit and/or does not fall under the definition of misconduct in research, the complainant and respondent will be notified of that decision.

f. Inquiry Procedure

An inquiry procedure shall be initiated immediately upon completion of the pre-inquiry review or, in cases involving the health or welfare of individuals, immediately upon receipt of an allegation of misconduct in research. The Vice President for Research will notify the respondent as soon as possible but no later than five (5) days from receipt of the complaint or completion of the pre-inquiry review. This notification will be in writing and shall mark the beginning of the formal inquiry. At the time of notification, all relevant research records and materials will be secured by the office of the Vice President for Research and the dean of the respondent's college will be notified of the allegation. If an allegation of research misconduct is referred to Ohio University by a federal agency, the University will review the referral and, if appropriate, move directly into the investigation procedure in Section IV.L.3.g.

The Vice President for Research, in consultation with the Professional Relations Committee of the Faculty Senate, shall appoint a Panel to conduct an inquiry to determine if a full investigation is warranted. The Panel shall consist of no fewer than three (3) persons. The Panel should include not only persons who have expertise in the discipline of the respondent(s), but also at least one other, unrelated scholarly discipline and a member of rank or position similar to the respondent. The Chair of the Panel will be selected by the Vice President for Research and staff support will be provided by the Vice President's office. The inquiry shall be completed and a written report submitted to the Vice President for Research within thirty (30) days from the date of notification of the respondent of the allegation or misconduct.

The inquiry is the initial stage of formal information-gathering and initial fact-finding to determine whether there is sufficient credible evidence of misconduct to warrant a full-scale investigation. The written report shall state what evidence was reviewed, summarize relevant interviews, and include conclusions of the inquiry. The Panel will have access to and the assistance of all units or offices at the University in conducting its review. Contacts with experts or witnesses outside the University will be authorized by the Chair of the Panel and made by staff members assisting the Panel. The respondent(s) will be interviewed as a part of the inquiry process and shall be given a copy of the report of the inquiry. If they comment on that report, their comments will be made a part of the record. If the inquiry takes longer than thirty (30) days to complete, the record of the inquiry shall include documentation of the reasons for exceeding the thirty (30) day period.

The Panel shall maintain sufficiently detailed documentation of inquiries to permit a later assessment of the reasons for determining that an investigation was not warranted, if necessary. The documentation will be delivered to the Vice President for Research at the conclusion of the inquiry for maintenance in a secure manner for a period of at least three (3) years after the termination of the inquiry.

Within ten (10) days following the completion of the inquiry, the Vice President for Research will review the recommendations of the Inquiry Panel and the written comments of respondent, if any are made, and determine, in consultation with the Provost, whether to conduct aninvestigation, drop the matter, or pursue some other appropriate action. The dean of the respondent's college will be notified of the decision of the Vice President. In cases where there are procedural or bias challenges or other problems identified in the inquiry process, the University may elect to proceed with an investigation or pursue other appropriate remedies, on advice of University counsel and in consultation with any affected federal agency. The course of action chosen will be reported to the respondent.  An institutional settlement at the inquiry stage cannot bind the federal government.

g. Investigation Procedure

An investigation shall be initiated within thirty (30) days of the determination by the Vice President for Research to proceed with the investigation. The Vice President for Research will notify the respondent and any federal agency that is providing support for research identified in the allegation of the university's decision to initiate an investigation. This notification will be written and will delineate the allegation of misconduct. In consultation with Professional Relations Committee of the Faculty Senate or other representative committee appropriate to the employment status of the respondent, the Vice President for Research shall appoint a Committee of no fewer than five (5) persons to conduct the investigation. The Committee shall include not only persons who have expertise in the disciplines of the respondents(s), but also at least one from some other, unrelated scholarly discipline and at least one member of rank or position similar to the respondent. The Chair of the Committee will be selected by the Vice President for Rresearch and staff support will be provided by the Vice President's office. The Committee will be authorized to secure necessary and appropriate expertise from Ohio University and elsewhere, to augment the expertise represented by the Committee membership. The Committee will have access to and the assistance of all units or offices at the university in conducting its review. The Vice President for Research will take appropriate interim administrative actions to protect any federal funds involved in the allegation and insure that the purposes of the federal financial assistance are carried out.

The investigation is the formal review of an allegation of misconduct with a formal examination and evaluation of relevant facts to draw a conclusion about whether the evidence persuasively supports a finding that misconduct has occurred. The investigation normally will include examination of documentation, including but not necessarily limited to the report of the Inquiry Panel, relevant research data and proposals, publications, correspondence, and memoranda of telephone calls. The respondent(s) will be interviewed as part of the investigative process. Contacts with experts or witnesses outside the university will be authorized by the Chair of the Committee and made by staff members assisting the Committee. Whenever possible, interviews should be conducted of all individuals involved including the complainant and other individuals who might have information regarding, key aspects of the allegations; summaries of these interviews should be prepared, provided to the interviewed party for comment or revision, and included as part of the investigatory file.

An investigation should ordinarily be completed within ninety (90) days of its initiation including conducting the investigation, preparing the report of findings, and making that report available for comment by the respondent(s). The report, along with all documentation used in the investigation and any comments provided by the respondent(s), shall be delivered to the Vice President for Research immediately upon completion.

The Vice President for Research will review the report and any comments from the respondent(s) and forward the report with his/her recommendations to the Provost for appropriate action. The Provost, following review of the findings and recommendations with the respondent(s), shall determine what disposition to make of the case(s). The Dean of the respondent's college will be informed of the Provost's action. The report of the investigation, and comments from the respondent(s), and the decision of the Provost with regard to sanctions will be forwarded to any appropriate funding agency.

h. Appeal Procedure

An appeal of the decision of the Provost may be made by the respondent by petition to the Professional Relations Committee of the Faculty Senate or other grievance committee appropriate to the employment status of the respondent(s). The appeal must be submitted in writing within fifteen (15) days of notification and is restricted to the body of evidence already presented. The grounds for appeal are limited to failure to follow appropriate procedures in the investigation or arbitrary and capricious decision making. The Professional Relations Committee shall submit its recommendations to the President within fifteen (15) days of notification and the President will make the final determination on the appeal and allegation.

i. Due Process Considerations

Precautions shall be taken against real or apparent conflicts of interest on the part of those involved in the inquiry or investigation. Diligent efforts, as appropriate, shall be undertaken to restore the reputations of persons alleged to have engaged in misconduct when allegations are not confirmed, and to undertake diligent efforts to protect the positions and reputations of those who, in good faith, make the allegations. In particular:

The individual(s) against whom the allegation of scientific misconduct has been made shall be afforded a prompt and thorough investigation, confidential treatment to the maximum extent possible under Ohio law, and an opportunity to comment on allegations and findings in the inquiry and/or the investigation before recommendations are made.

It is the obligation of every employee at Ohio University to cooperate, in good faith, with inquiries and investigations of possible misconduct.

The privacy of those who in good faith report the apparent misconduct in research shall be protected to the maximum extent possible.

It is the responsibility of the University to undertake diligent efforts, as appropriate, to restore the reputation(s) of the respondent(s) when allegations are not confirmed. These efforts may include notification of the findings to all agencies, sponsors, or other entities of individuals initially informed of the inquiry and/or investigation.

j. Reporting

The University will comply with all reporting requirements concerning scientific misconduct on federally supported research. Project-specific information on such requirements is maintained in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies.

k. Retaliation Complaints

For purposes of responding to whistleblower retaliation complaints, the Vice President for Research will be the University official responsible for establishing and implementing policies consistent with 42CFR50.103(d)(13) and the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) Guidelines for Institutions and Whistleblowers: Responding to Possible Retaliation Against Whistleblowers in Extramural Research (November 20, 1995) and will serve as the university's liaison to ORI. If the involvement of the Vice President for Research creates a real or apparent conflict of interest with the university's obligation to protect good faith whistleblowers, the President shall appoint a substitute responsible official who has no conflict of interest.

A whistleblower who wishes to receive the procedural protection described by the ORI Guidelines shall file his or her retaliation complaint with the Vice President for Research within 180 days from the date the whistleblower became aware or should have become aware of the alleged adverse action.

The University shall review and resolve all whistleblowers retaliation complaints in conformity with the processes outlined in the ORI Guidelines including notification to the whistleblower of the receipt of the complaint within fifteen (15) days, and shall resolve the complaint within 180 days after receipt of the complaint. If the University fails to respond to the complaint within fifteen (15) days, the whistleblower may file the retaliation complaint directly with ORI.

Endnotes

[1] Department Chair is equivalent to School Director or Division Coordinator at the Regional Campuses.

[2] For those committees whose representatives are chosen by the faculty senators, the chair of faculty senate will appoint one senator from each college who is responsible for reporting the nominations in writing to the chair of faculty senate. This senator should also contact the nominees to determine their willingness to serve on the committee prior to submitting the names to the chair of faculty senate. Nominations will be sought at a meeting of the senators from each college immediately after the September senate meeting.