【目的】 探讨高校学术不端处理办法存在的问题,为进一步完善高校学术不端防治工作提供参考。【方法】 采用数据调研法、比较分析法、归纳法等,通过查阅相关网站、新闻和政策,以《高等学校预防与处理学术不端行为办法》(以下简称“教育部40号令”)为基础,细分6个方面32个指标,梳理42所“双一流”高校的学术不端行为处理办法,并作对比分析。【结果】 对于学术不端行为处理的相关文件,各高校表述各异;共有25所高校出台了含有“学术不端行为处理办法”字样的文件,只有18所高校在教育部40号令之后更新了各自的处理办法;文件的相关表述各异,存在诸多表达待改进的地方;从高校发布学术不端行为相关处理办法的角度指出存在的不足,并给出处理学术不端行为的建议。【结论】 各高校对教育部40号令的反应不一致,从一个侧面体现高校对于学术不端现象的认知与态度;高校学术期刊应抓住契机,深入到学术不端预防、调查、认定等相关环节中,主动作为,为高校学术不端行为的处理工作作出自己的贡献。
[Purposes] This paper aims to analyze the problems in the handling of academic misconduct by double first-class universities, which is expected to serve as a reference for strengthening the prevention and control of academic misconduct in universities. [Methods] With the methods of data research, comparative analysis, and induction, we summarized and compared the handling methods of academic misconduct by 42 double first-class universities from 6 aspects with 32 indexes on the basis of the Measures to Prevent and Handle Academic Misconduct in Colleges and Universities (hereinafter referred to as Decree No. 40 of the Ministry of Education). [Findings] In general, the description of the documents on handling academic misconduct is different among universities. Only 25 universities released documents with the tiles containing "measures for handling academic misconduct", and 18 of them updated the handling methods after the promulgation of Decree No. 40 of the Ministry of Education. These documents all have certain limitations. In terms of academic misconduct handling methods, we pointed out the deficiencies and put forward corresponding suggestions. [Conclusions] Universities showed different responses to Decree No. 40 of the Ministry of Education, which reflects their understanding of and attitude to academic misconduct. University academic journals should seize the opportunity to take the initiative in further enhancing the prevention and control, investigation, and identification of academic misconduct, thus doing their bit in dealing with academic misconduct.
Prevention and control,