In this article, Dr John Richard Schrock, who teaches at Emporia State University in Kansas, explains the vast differences between research, citation and teaching styles in Chinese and American university students, citing cultural and education gaps for instances of plagiarism.

In the technical world of bio-informatics, two University of Kansas computer scientists were riding high in 2009 having published three articles with an international audience. Portions of all three of their articles had been lifted from other scientists' work. The entire summarizing statement in their presentation had come from someone else's journal article.

A well-known obesity researcher will plead guilty to making material false statements in a 1999 grant application worth $542,000 from the US National Institutes of Health. The researcher, who held various research positions at the University of Vermont (UVM) College of Medicine in Burlington could go to jail for up to 5 years.

A former Texas Tech University researcher, who was convicted of mishandling harassment complaints and cheating the university out of its share of clinical-research money, was sentenced last week to two years in prison and a $15,000 fine.

The professoriate is a gatekeeper, determining a student's first exposure to ethical standards, traditions. Many observers of contemporary academic culture have documented cases if irresponsible and unethical behavior within the professoriate. Examples include lateness for class, use of vulgarity in scholarly forums, showing favouritism among students, improper use of campus funds, plagiarism, sexual liaisons with students, failure to properly perform administrative duties, and, most basic, unwillingness to uphold the value of truth in teaching and research.

Northern Kentucky accused five professors of fabricating data in scholarly papers, duplicating large chunks of their own work in several papers, plagiarizing, and listing as authors a number of professors at the university who did not contribute.

Nearly half of the medical-school faculty members who serve on boards charged with protecting volunteers in clinical research also serve as industry consultants, duals roles that raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest, according to a study published today in the journal Academic Medicine. The study found that 47% of the faculty members serving on university panels, also had consulted for industry within the past three years.

The Bush administration proposed guidelines last month that would let research institutions decide whether to restrict researchers' financial interests in studies involving human subjects, and whether such interests should be reported to the research volunteers.