Jump to accessibility statement Skip to content

University of Sunderland Annual Statement on Research Integrity 2017/18

Approved by Research and Innovation Group of the Academic Board.

Background

In 2012, Universities UK published the document, ‘The Concordat to support research integrity’ on behalf of the UK’s major research funding organisations (including the Research Councils, HEFCE and devolved funding councils) and joint signatories to emphasise their commitment to maintaining the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research. In July 2013 HEFCE as a signatory to the Concordat wrote to all HE institutions outlining the need to demonstrate their compliance with it as a condition for research funding from 2014/15. The UK Research Integrity Office (UKRIO), (an independent charity providing advice and support to the sector) recommended in 2013/14 that institutions develop a Code of Practice to strengthen compliance with requirements set out in the Concordat, supported by appropriate processes. The University’s Code of Practice was approved by the Academic Board at the beginning of 2014/15.

Under the Concordat, the University has five commitments:

1. To maintain the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research.

2. To ensure that research is conducted according to appropriate ethical, legal, and professional frameworks, obligations and standards.

3. To support a research environment that is underpinned by a culture of integrity and based on good governance, best practice and support for the development of researchers.

4. To use transparent, robust and fair processes to deal with allegations of research misconduct should they arise.

5. To work together to strengthen the integrity of research and to review progress regularly and openly.

The UKRIO framework recommends the following conditions to meet Concordat requirements:

Annual statement

The University of Sunderland is committed to maintaining the integrity and probity of its academic research. To this end the University regards it as fundamental that all research must conform to good academic practice and that the dissemination of the results must be truthful and fair, and has accordingly adopted a Code of Practice for Research to inform staff and students of the standards of behaviour it expects. The Code of Practice is neither a set of regulations nor a process document but is a general statement of principles and expectations in relation to the standards of behaviour of those engaged in research at the University. Nevertheless, the Code does reference institutional policies and processes that underpin the University’s commitment to maintaining the highest standards of research integrity. All staff and students of the University are under a general obligation to act in a professional and ethical manner, and to preserve and protect the integrity and probity of research.

The University of Sunderland is committed to compliance with the formal agreement or ‘concordat’ concerning standards and integrity in UK research. The concordat embodies commitments that will assure Government, the wider public and the international community that research in the UK continues to be underpinned by the highest standards of rigour and integrity.

The standards of performance and behaviour expected of all those engaged in research at the University are as follows:

Guiding principles:

It is a requirement of the University that all staff and students involved in academic research access and observe the requirements of the Code. While establishing the general principles of research conduct, the Code cannot cover all situations and eventualities and therefore it is the responsibility of individuals to seek further guidance if in doubt. The Code is applicable to all academic staff, researchers, research students, research support staff, and research-related administrators.

The Code is not intended to limit research interest or endeavour. It does not imply a requirement for academics and students to be risk adverse in their research activity but rather to be risk aware and take responsibility for their actions. It seeks to ensure that all engaged in research are fully aware of the expectations placed upon them, are appropriately skilled to undertake their work to the highest possible standards, and establishes appropriate measures and procedures should things go wrong.

Fostering good practice in academic research is predominantly about self-regulation, supported by an environment and culture that promotes integrity at the highest level of the University. The University actively communicates the Code to all research active staff and students.

Failure of researchers to comply with the Code is likely to be subject to a formal investigation of misconduct and may result in disciplinary procedures.

Measures undertaken to strengthen compliance in 2017/18

Promotion of Code of Practice

The Head of the University Research Office and new Chair of UREG undertook a range of activity to promote the requirements of the Code of Practice to staff and student groups, including all staff communications, updates on the ‘Research Integrity’ section of the University website, attendance at Faculty Conferences and departmental/team meetings.

The Academic Handbook was revised at the start of the 2017/18 Academic Year to include a full version of the Code of Practice, (AQH-L17 – The Code of Practice for Research). All staff and students submitting an application through the University ethics system are required to acknowledge their awareness and acceptance of the ‘Code’ as part of the submission process.

Implementation of online Ethical Review System

A key focus of 2017/18 activity revolved around the institutional-wide implementation of the research ethical review system.

Communication

A broad range of activity for the promotion and communication of the systems was coordinated through the UREG, highlighting key features of the new system:

Group members engaged staff involved in personal research, supervising research degree students and leading research modules on taught courses to outline the requirements and functionality of the revised review system.

Training and development

Training on the use of the system was provided to key staff and student groups throughout the 2017/18 Academic Year. UREG members and the system administrator based in the University Research Office were available to provide support to individuals. Feedback from staff groups and individuals was used to update the systems integrated guidance.

Monitoring of system usage and compliance

Reports on system use and compliance were considered by the UREG throughout 2017/18. The reports focused on a range of performance data including:

A summary of the performance data was provided in the annual UREG report to the Research and Innovation Group of the Academic Board.

Research Ethics Group

The University Research Ethics Group (UREG) was established at the start of the 2016/17 academic year and is responsible to the Research and Innovation Group (RIG) and Academic Board for:

Leadership of the UREG was transferred to the newly appointed Director of Post-Graduate Research at the beginning of the 2017/18 academic year. A new role within the university staffing structure, the job description required the post-holder to lead the UREG in maintaining the highest standards of ethical research across the institution. The role provides dedicated work-loaded time to support and promote the university’s commitment to ethical research.

The UREG reports on an annual basis to the RIG. A copy of the 2017/18 report was received by RIG on 3 October 2018.

Policy development

A review of all current University research ethic policies was undertaken by a working group of the UREG during 2017/18.

Instances, allegations and investigations of research misconduct

The responsibility for receiving allegations of misconduct in research is with the Head of the Research Support Office. Their contact details are available on external facing pages of the University website. All allegations are investigated under the processes and procedures outlines in the Code of Practice.

In 2017/18 no allegations of potential misconduct in relation to research integrity were received or investigated.