Scholars said that academic misconduct could be attributed to the lack of self-discipline and respect for authority, but it is also inseparable from the utilitarianism in discipline construction and research mechanisms of colleges and universities.

 

The Ministry of Education recently released regulations on academic misconduct in universities in an effort to improve the academic environment nationwide.

For the first time, the ministry has comprehensively defined different types of academic dishonesty and established a disciplinary mechanism, principles as well as precautionary measures.
 

The past few years have seen frequent headlines about scholarly misconduct, including academic corruption, falsified research and plagiarism. The creation of a ghostwriting industry has also sparked deep concerns, as these misbehaviors have brought serious damage to the ethics of higher education and polluted the academic environment.
 

Some scholars said that the new rules demonstrate the government’s determination to clean up academia.
 

“Compared to previous measures, the regulations are more practical, and I believe they must be effective,” said Yue Zhen, a professor of Chinese literature at the Huazhong University of Science and Technology.

The rules define six categories of academic dishonesty and specify punishments for each. They also make it clear that institutions of higher learning and their academic committees are responsible for enforcement.
 

The regulations seem reasonable, but no university has formulated any rules yet for identifying academic misconduct, said Li Yunfei, deputy dean of the College of Chinese Language and Culture at Jinan University in Guangdong Province.
 

Scholars said that academic misconduct could be attributed to the lack of self-discipline and respect for authority, but it is also inseparable from the utilitarianism in discipline construction and research mechanisms of colleges and universities.
 

“For example, most institutions of higher learning stipulate that doctoral students, even postgraduates, cannot graduate or obtain their degree without publishing papers,” Li said. “Some teaching- or practice-oriented institutions, even vocational schools, require teachers to publish a certain amount of ‘research’ achievements as a condition for professional title assessment.”
 

Earlier this year, Chang Ping, a teacher at Henan University, was praised for her dedication to her students. Chang has never published books, written papers or applied for professional titles in her 30-year career, choosing instead to focus on her teaching duties.
 

Though teaching is a core component of scholarly life, publishing papers is seen as the route to prestigious titles and a higher salary, which creates tremendous pressure on many academics. Many are tempted to seek shortcuts, like exploiting connections and seeking projects, which are hotbeds of influence peddling.
 

A holistic approach to evaluating professors is needed, said Cai Ping, a professor from the School of Liberal Arts at Guangdong Ocean University, arguing that papers and projects shoud not be the only criteria.
 

Although harsh punishments are necessary to contain the unhealthy trends in the academic community, it is more important to prevent them from happening.
 

Cai said that supervisors should discipline themselves and serve as an example for their students, while spelling out severe consequences of academic dishonesty at the beginning of their college life.  

 

Li Yongjie and Wang Guanglu are reporters at the Chinese Social Sciecens Today.