On March 15, Zhejiang University publicly handled the "He Haibo's thesis fraud incident": He Haibo was expelled from the faculty for academic misconduct such as plagiarism in eight papers; Wu, director of the Pharmacology Research Office of Traditional Chinese Medicine where He Haibo is located, was dismissed. To combat academic fraud, we need to use heavy codes! The result of this treatment makes people applaud!

At present, academic fraud, improper style of study, shoddy work, plagiarism and other phenomena exist in some universities and research institutes to varying degrees, and the social impact is very bad. On June 5438+05, the head of the Ministry of Education said that we should not shirk our responsibility, tolerate or be soft, just like the sports world's opposition to doping.

To combat academic fraud, "heavy code" is indispensable. However, to combat academic fraud, it is even more necessary to treat the symptoms! Better late than never, take precautions, social supervision, legal deterrence.

To combat academic fraud, it is imperative to thoroughly clean up the soil that breeds fraud, change the current assessment orientation based on the number of papers, establish an assessment system based on the quality of papers, and reverse the academic atmosphere of quick success and instant benefit from the source.

Qiu Chengtong, a famous mathematician in China, believes that the reason why the quality of education and scientific research in Chinese mainland is not high is that some universities and competent departments like "ten thousand Jin per mu" and neglect the mission of education and scientific research.

In most disciplines, it is difficult to produce results without a decade or two of accumulation. "I have been on the bench for ten years." However, at present, the assessment of teachers in colleges and universities is basically based on papers, the number of papers published and SCI (American Science Citation Index), and papers are linked to their own interests, such as tickets, rooms and seats. These hard assessment indicators lead researchers not to sit on the "cold bench". Under the invisible pressure, the impetuous mentality gradually spread. Some teachers are not serious about their research and are keen on "building relationships", pulling projects and acting as "academic contractors". Some teachers publish more than ten papers in "core journals" a year, and it is often these scholars who are commended at the end of the year.

To combat academic misconduct, we should establish a prevention and control system that combines self-discipline with heteronomy, internal governance with social supervision. Academic fraud is not only a moral problem, but also difficult to eradicate by self-discipline, so it is necessary to formulate operational academic moral behavior norms; Establish an academic ethics Committee independent of the administrative system and veto academic ethics with one vote. At present, the Ministry of Education vigorously builds a punishment and prevention system and exerts social forces to supervise.

We must also crack down on academic corruption and get out of the mode of "one's own supervision and one's own investigation". Up to now, China has not established a national academic anti-counterfeiting institution, and it also lacks effective inspection of the quality and authenticity of government-funded projects. Most of the fraud incidents are handled by schools alone, and some institutions and scientific research institutions are ambiguous or even tolerant. In recent years, there have been many cases of fraud, but few have been dealt with seriously. On this issue, the practices of some countries are worth learning. The United States has set up a "Research Integrity Office" under the Department of Public Health Services to investigate the authenticity of government-funded projects, and counterfeiters cannot participate in any government-funded research projects for a certain period of time.

Combating academic fraud also needs legal support. In China, the most severe punishment for false papers is dismissal and dismissal from public office. Compared with the huge fame and fortune obtained by fraud, the risk is very small. In neighboring South Korea, not only Seoul National University revoked the professorship after the "father of cloning" Huang Yuxi faked it; South Korean prosecutors also investigated Hwang Woo-suk and his research team, and found that he fraudulently misappropriated "government research funds" and filed a lawsuit against him. In contrast, China's laws are obviously lagging behind in cracking down on academic fraud, and it is impossible to investigate the criminal responsibility of academic counterfeiters.

Moral self-discipline is not everything. Only by changing the baton, relying on institutional constraints, giving full play to the role of social supervision and the rule of law, and taking a multi-pronged approach, can scholars be unwilling, afraid and unable to violate academic ethics, and the cancer of academic fraud may become smaller and smaller until it is finally eradicated.