Queen’s University did not investigate 'the body of research as a whole' as promised on April 07, 2014
A new case of blatant plagiarism at Queen’s has been discovered:
David Chandler also writes for MIT NEWS.
David L Chandler: "But a training programme by American Airlines not only failed to prepare the co-pilot for the true consequences of such turbulence and of various measures to compensate for it, it actually made things worse by leading him to expect far more disruption of the plane’s motion than would really have occurred."
Queen's Professor: "But a training program by American Airlines had failed to prepare the co-pilot for the true consequences of such turbulence and of the various measures that should be used to compensate for it. The training program appears to actually have made things worse by leading him to expect far more disruption to the aircraft’s motion than would really have occurred."
(Emphasis added to show how the original paragraphs were altered)
David L Chandler: "This led him to overcompensate, apparently believing that more extreme manoeuvres were required to control the plane."
Queen's Professor :"This led him to overcompensate, apparently believing that more extreme manoeuvres were required to control the plane."
David L Chandler: "Unknown to either the co-pilot or the airline’s trainers, a change in the way the plane’s rudder mechanism worked seriously worsened the problem. The change made the rudder control pedals far more sensitive than any other plane’s – including other Airbus models – and the sensitivity increased dramatically with speed. This is exactly the circumstance where excessive use of the rudder can cause high stresses on it."
Queen's Professor: "Unknown to either the co-pilot or to the airline's trainers, a change in the way the plane's rudder mechanism worked had seriously worsened the problem. The change made the rudder control pedals far more sensitive than any other plane's - including other Airbus models - and the sensitivity increased dramatically with speed. This is exactly the circumstance where excessive use of the rudder can cause high stresses on it."
David L Chandler: "Pilots know that they cannot use the plane’s rudder – normally used only while taxiing on the ground – above a certain speed, known as the manoeuvring speed, in this case 250 knots."
Queen's Professor : "Pilots know that they cannot use the plane's rudder - normally used only while taxiing on the ground - above a certain speed, known as the manoeuvring speed, which in this case was 250 knots."
David L Chandler: "The Airbus A300 has a tail made of lightweight composite materials, which is still relatively new in commercial airliner design, and some analysts had suggested this accident might point to risks in the use of such materials. "
Queen's Professor : " The Airbus A300 has a tail made of lightweight composite materials and some analysts had suggested this accident might point to risks in the use of such materials."
David L Chandler: "But most apparently thought that it was safe to use the rudder to its full extent right up to that speed – something the plane’s designers knew was not the case. In fact, pushing the rudder first to one extreme and then the other, as in flight 587’s case, exposed it to stresses that were double its design limits."
Queen's Professor : "But most of them apparently thought that it was safe to use the rudder to its full extent right up to that speed - something the plane's designers knew was not the case. In fact, pushing the rudder first to one extreme and then the other, as was done in Flight 587's case, exposed the vertical tail surface to stresses that were double its design limits."
David L Chandler: "But the board made it clear that both faulty design and bad training contributed strongly in leading the co-pilot to his tragically incorrect actions, which caused the American Airlines flight 587’s tail to break off. "
Queen's Professor : "But the board made it clear that both faulty design and bad training contributed strongly in leading the co-pilot to his tragically incorrect actions, which caused the American Airlines flight 587's tail to break off."
David L Chandler: "And in this case, the board concluded, the turbulence would have been no problem if the co-pilot had not used the rudder at all, which is the normal course of action."
Queen's Professor : "This turbulence should not have been a problem if the co-pilot, who was flying the aircraft, had not used the rudder at all, which is the normal course of action."
David L Chandler: "But the board emphatically disputed that conclusion. "
Queen's Professor : "The board, however, emphatically disputed that conclusion."
David L Chandler: "In fact, NTSB materials engineer Matt Fox, who conducted detailed tests on the remains of the rudder, says he knew of no other aircraft whose rudder could have withstood the forces the tragic flight was exposed to.
Board member Carol Carmody agrees, saying that after reviewing the test results “I was surprised by the strength and durability of the material.”
Queen's Professor : "In fact, a NTSB materials engineer, who conducted detailed tests on the remains of the rudder, said he knew of no other aircraft whose rudder could have withstood the forces that the tragic flight was exposed to and a Board member stated that after reviewing the test results they were surprised by the strength and durability of the material. "
Plagiarism: Presenting and using another’s published or unpublished work, including theories, concepts, data, source material, methodologies or findings, including graphs and images, as one’s own, without appropriate referencing and without required permission. (Source: Tri-Agency Framework: Responsible Conduct of Research)
Excerpt from CAUT REPORT, April 2015
August 27, 2015
Allegations of institutional non-compliance filed against Queen's University:
July 21, 2014
October 31, 2014
April 17, 2015
Excerpt from the CAUT Report:
“We believe that the harassment charges were initiated by administration to silence Professor shirkhanzadeh from making any further allegations of academic fraud and misconduct and proving an embarrassment to Queen’s”
August 20, 2015
In retaliation, Queen’s administration rescinds academic leave
"Academic staff must not be hindered or impeded in exercising their civil rights as individuals including the right to contribute to social change through free expression of opinion on matters of public interest. Academic staff must not suffer any institutional penalties because of the exercise of such rights."
Approved : February 09, 2015
Rescinded : May 08, 2015
LORI brings to light the actions of Queen’s University Faculty Association (QUFA):
QUFA’s attempts to prevent the release of the CAUT report to the Federal Funding Agency are alarming:
* QUFA Warning on May 05, 2015:
"I advise you neither to refer to the report nor to send it or links to it to anyone else inside or outside Queen’s University. Doing so may have already triggered the nullification of the MOS or may trigger it in future – we don’t yet know. If that happens, your sabbatical will be withdrawn, ......"
The Collective Agreement between QUFA and Queen’s University states:
Posted: August 15, 2015
NEW article in the Queen's Journal:
According to the co-director of the CDIO, Johan Malmqvist, Queen’s approached CDIO on June 30 and directed CDIO to remove the papers.
Queen’s should have retracted these 4 plagiarized papers in 2013 without intimidating the complainant. Queen's did not investigate all allegations in 2013.
These papers were finally removed under pressure after LORI had extensive communications in 2014 with Maria Zuber, Vice Principal for Research – MIT , Johan Malmqvist, co-director of CDIO , Dr. Alf-Erik Almstedt, Chalmers Vice- President, and the Chalmers Professional Ethics Committee.
Yet Another Queen's Paper on 'Engineering Education' With Multiple Problems:
“Use of Aircraft Crash Cases in Teaching Engineering”, Proceedings of the ASEE St. Lawrence Section Conference Engineering Teaching and LearningPractices, Oct 19-20, 2007, Toronto
American Society For Engineering Education (ASEE) confirms that
" This paper was found to contain a significant amount of duplicate materials from a paper delivered by the author at the 3rd International CDIO Conference, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA June11- 14, 2007."
Morrisville State College removes the paper from its website after extensive communication with LORI.
Of course the paper delivered at the 3rd International CDIO Conference was found by the CDIO to represent plagiarism as reported in the previous post (below). We are dealing with multiple problems.
4 papers on Engineering Education from Queen’s University were found by the CDIO to represent plagiarism
On February 21, 2014, Maria Zuber, Vice Principal for Research – MIT wrote:
“Although MIT hosted the CDIO Conferences in 2006 and 2007 and the CDIO website at that time, another CDIO partner, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden, has assumed responsibility for maintaining the CDIO website. Accordingly, we shared our results with this institution to consider any further action.”
LORI can confirm now that 4 papers on Engineering Education from Queen’s University were found by the CDIO to represent plagiarism.
In one of the plagiarized paper, the author argues that students need to be exposed to ethical issues.
In another plagiarized paper, the authors argue that "engineering history" should be included in a CDIO program to "demonstrate the importance of ethics in engineering, to provide examples that demonstrate how difficult it is in some situations to know what is the most ethical solution to the problem at hand ..."
In another paper, the author argues that "some discussion of engineering ethics should be incorporated throughout an engineering program". But large sections of papers are lifted from various sources without acknowledgement.
Queen’s University did not investigate “the body of [Professor X’s] research as a whole”
On April 07, 2014, the Vice-Principal (Research) declared that “the university will, in accordance with its institutional responsibility to do so, now assume full responsibility for investigating the body of [Professor X’s] research as a whole ….”
Surprise, surprise: Queen’s University did not investigate “the body of [Professor X’s] research as a whole”
Many of the allegations are left unaddressed. Moreover, the University was expected to investigate numerous allegations of redundant publication that were formally submitted to the Secretariat on Responsible Conduct of Research (SRCR). The University did not address these specific allegations.
The University does not accept the Framework definition of redundant publication, nor does it appear to accept the RCR Framework Interpretation and the Publication Guidelines:
This constitutes institutional non-compliance.
CAUT to provide QUFA with counsel on arbitration between Shirkhanzadeh and Queen's University
"The flag should’ve been at half-mast to mourn the death of the university’s commitment to academic integrity. "
Steve Iscoe, retired professor of biomedical and molecular sciences
"To read that Queen’s is dismissing CAUT’s report on academic freedom reminded me of apartheid regimes dismissing UN reports on racism, or torture regimes dismissing Amnesty International reports on human rights: they always say “no jurisdiction”. Of course, CAUT has jurisdiction on issues of academic freedom. "
Floyd Rudmin, retired professor of psychology,
University of Tromso, Norway
June 30, 2015
Kingston, ON, Canada / CKWS TV
June 04, 2015 05:59 pm
" QUEEN’S UNIVERSITY STANDS ACCUSED OF TRYING TO SILENCE A FACULTY MEMBER, WHO BROUGHT FORWARD CLAIMS OF ACADEMIC FRAUD AND MISCONDUCT ABOUT ANOTHER RESEARCHER AT THE UNIVERSITY."
Queen's University violated academic freedom, CAUT report says
Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT)-
Report of the Ad Hoc Investigatory Committee - April 2015
LORI was forced in 2014, under threat of discipline from the Queen’s University management, to remove a substantial number of posts from this website in contravention of rights of academic freedom and freedom of expression.
In 2014, the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) launched an investigation into the violation of academic freedom. The CAUT report is now published and can be downloaded here
CAUT is the national voice of 68,000 academic and general staff at more than 120 universities and colleges across Canada.
Excerpts from the CAUT Report:
May 14, 2015
Queen's Universty says first author (currently with Memorial University) submitted this paper without the co-author's knowledge
posted: May 02, 2015
...................More to come soon.
Posted: August 11, 2014
Letter to the editor (May 20, 2014), Whig-Standard
Queen's University Experiments in Liquid Diffusion (QUELD) Funded by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA)
Posted: June 17, 2014
Canadian Association of University Teachers
The Canadian Association of University Teachers has established an Ad Hoc Investigatory Committee to examine the situation of Prof. Morteza Shirkhanzadeh in the Faculty of Engineering and Applied Science.
Posted: June 3, 2014
Violations of the Senate Policy on Research Integrity:
Queen’s University restricts the number of research misconduct complaints that may be reported
The Senate Policy on Research Integrity (2012) clearly indicates that “The responsibilities of all members of the Queen’s community include not only fulfilling the integrity expectations of this Policy, but also reporting suspected misconduct according to the procedures defined.” (Emphasis added)
It is clear that the Senate policy does not limit the number of instances of suspected research misconduct that members can report to the University.
It is also clear that the Collective Agreement between Queen’s University and QUFA does not limit the number of allegations:
17.4.1 All allegations of fraud or misconduct in academic research and scholarly activity shall be in writing, with documented evidence, signed, dated and forwarded to the Vice-Principal (Research). The Vice-Principal (Research) or delegate shall investigate the allegations in accordance with the provisions of Article 20.
So why is Queen’s University, on the advice of legal counsel, trying to limit the number of internal complaints that need to be filed?
Is Queen’s trying to limit the number of internal complaints that eventually become available on NSERC’s website?
Unfortunately, in situations where the research integrity has been ignored by an institution for decades, the number of cases of suspected misconduct is bound to be very high and it may not be possible to file all allegations with the required supporting documents in one month or even in one year. Nonetheless, it is still the responsibility of members of Queen’s community to file the allegations and it is the responsibility of the institution to investigate specific allegations and correct the records.
Posted: April 29, 2014
Is Massachusetts Institute of Technology responsible for the publication of misleading papers online?
–Communications with Maria Zuber, MIT Vice President for Research and responsible for research integrity and compliance
A large number of Queen’s University’s papers on Engineering Education accepted thorough CDIO conference and published online by MIT contain fabricated data and substantial plagiarized material lifted from other sources. These cases are really bizarre and embarrassing and show poor oversight by the CDIO conference organizers and MIT. See here, here, here, and here. And there are more.
Six months after MIT was informed about these misleading papers, we received an email from Doris Brodeur who is affiliated with the CDIO Initiative and MIT. Her conclusion:
“The papers were reviewed by the International CDIO Conference Committees of 2006 and 2007 and met the criteria for inclusion in the conference. We do not have a separate review process for including (or excluding) papers on the CDIO website.”
In reality there were no guidelines for the committee members to reject papers that violated publication ethics. Given the fact that there are multiple cut-and -paste papers that escaped detection; it seems that nobody even read these papers.
We have now received a response from the Vice President.
More on this later….
Posted: December 28, 2013
In the following research misconduct case reported earlier, the second author (Jane T. Paul) is Jane Oosthuizen.
Patrick Oosthuizen and Jane T. Paul, "TEACHING THE HISTORY OF ENGINEERING: REASONS AND POSSIBLE APPROACHES", Proceedings of the 3rd International CDIO Conference, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, June 11-14, 2007.
Posted, Oct.04, 2013
Handy Tips for Tri-Council Grants
Travel expenses incurred to present redundant and ‘cut -and -paste’ papers in different locations are not among the eligible expenses listed by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
How about a modified collective agreement?
This COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT
Between .... ((hereinafter called the Association) and .....(hereinafter called the University)
Article 46 Fraud and Research Misconduct
The long-term health of the University requires that the University take research misconduct seriously. ………….
46. 1. 2 (a) The parties agree that failure to act firmly and transparently in dealing with research misconduct can have a serious adverse effect on all members. The parties agree that repeated cases of plagiarism and data fabrication are bad news for all members and erode public trust. The parties agree that failure to act to protect the reputation of members and institution is grievable pusuant to......
46. 1. 2 (b) The parties agree that no one can have confidence in the research results of the institution if we keep sweeping abuses under the carpet every time. The parties agree that covering up the research misconduct is worse than the research misconduct itself.
46. 1. 2 (n) The parties agree that it is the university's responsibility to make sure that the misleading research records and research publications are corrected promptly by directly contacting funding agency and publishers concerned. The parties agree that it is wrong to believe that secrecy is in the interest of all concerned. ………….
Posted: June 16, 2013
Council of Ontario Universities-
Patrick Oosthuizen - Member | Academic Colleague Representative
Plagiarism is not a victimless crime. Queen's should publicly acknowledge the authorship of real authors and inform the Council of Ontario Universities.
Posted: April 08, 2013
Council of Ontario Universities-
Patrick Oosthuizen - Member | Academic Colleague Representative
The Ontario Universities Council on Quality Assurance (the Quality Council) is "an arm’s length body designed to ensure rigorous quality assurance of university undergraduate and graduate programs." The Quality Council has nine members, including Patrick Oosthuizen from Queen's University. Patrick Oosthuizen's Bio posted on the council website includes this paragraph:
“He [Patrick Oosthuizen] was greatly involved with the CDIO initiative in engineering education in its earlier stages. This work involved investigation of the criteria that define a high-quality engineering program.”
In fact Patrick Oosthuizen's CDIO- related publications on 'Engineering Education' contain substantial plagiarized materials. See, for example, here, here, here, and here. The Bio needs to be corrected to better reflect the facts. This is particularly important for an arm's length body which is designed to ensure "rigorous quality assurance" of programs.
You can’t be involved in quality assurance of undergraduate and graduate programs in Ontario and plagiarizing.
Posted: March 23, 2013
4th paper on 'Engineering Education' containing substantial plagiarized material.
Author: Patrick Oosthuizen,Vice-Chair of Senate , Queen's University, Canada
"THE ART OF ENGINEERING – ITS PLACE IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION"
Proceedings of the 4th International CDIO Conference, Hoogeschool Gent, Gent, Belgium, June 16-19, 2008
Big chunks of this paper are lifted from the work of other authors without acknowledgement. In some cases, paragraphs have been cosmetically altered. The Vice-Chair has taken all figures from various online sources.
Posted: March 13, 2013
Should Senate expel serial plagiarists?
According to the University Secretariat, Senate is "responsible for determining all matters of academic character affecting the University as a whole, including student discipline. It shares responsibility with the Board of Trustees for appointing the Principal."
Posted: March 10, 2013
Third paper on 'Engineering Education' containing substantial plagiarized material.
Author: Vice-Chair of Senate* , Queen's University, Canada
"THE OTHER NEW YORK CRASHES: THEIR USE IN A CDIO PROGRAM", Patrick H. Oosthuizen, Vice-Chair, Senate of Queen's University, and Chair of the Board of the Faculty of Applied Science ., Proceedings of the 3rd International CDIO Conference, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, June 11-14, 2007.
The author argues that "some discussion of engineering ethics should be incorporated throughout an engineering program". But large sections of his paper are lifted from various online sources including an article by Brian Kates in Boston Globe without acknowledgement. Read the rest of this entry>>>
Posted: February 22, 2013
Another Cut - and- Paste, Plagiarized Paper on 'Engineering Education' Authored by the Vice-Chair of Senate, Queen's University, Canada
Patrick Oosthuizen and Jane T. Paul, "TEACHING THE HISTORY OF ENGINEERING: REASONS AND POSSIBLE APPROACHES", Proceedings of the 3rd International CDIO Conference, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, June 11-14, 2007.
The vice-chair argues in the paper that "engineering history" should be included in a CDIO program to "demonstrate the importance of ethics in engineering, to provide examples that demonstrate how difficult it is in some situations to know what is the most ethical solution to the problem at hand ..."
Examples of text lifted are shown below (emphases added). It seems that the author has pulled material from a number of sources and repackaged them as his own work:
Posted: February 09, 2013
Posted: Feb. 5, 2013
Retract the papers, Mr. Principal. Yet another case of blatant plagiarism by the vice-chair of Senate!
Two Queen's papers on 'Engineering Education' contain substantial text lifted from the work of other researchers without citation.
Both papers are written by Professor Patrick Oosthuizen(P.Eng.), Vice-Chair, Senate of Queen's University, and Chair of the Board of the Faculty of Applied Science . The author argues that students need to be exposed to ethical issues. He also discusses the significance of writing " simply, but effectively". Read the rest of this entry >>>
Posted: January 27, 2013
Posted: January 11, 2013
Posted: January 09, 2013
"No one can have confidence in the results of Canadian research if we sweep abuses under the carpet"
Posted: Dec.9, 2012
Selective Reporting of Data and Affiliation Misrepresentation
“Weldability of Austenitic Manganese Steel”
J. Mendez, M. Ghoreshy, W.B.F. Mackay, T.J.N. Smith, R.W. Smith∗
This paper appears to have been accepted for publication through a conference in Turkey. The corresponding author is Reginald W Smith from Queen’s University who has many official retractions , including those in JMPT.
Graphs, tables, and most of the discussion and conclusion sections in this paper are all copied from a Master thesis that was submitted to Queen’s University by J. Mendez almost 28 years ago (J Mendez, Weldability of Austenitic Steel, MSc thesis, Queen’s University,1984 ). Other parts of this paper, for example the section on page 601, Fig. 3 (a), and Fig. (3b) are copied from two other sources....... Read the rest >>
Posted: December 06, 2012
posted November 18, 2012
What is redundant publication?
The federal framework for the responsible conduct of research lists redundant publications as a breach of the rules governing federally funded research.
The framework defines ' redundant publication' as “re-publication of one’s own previously published work or part thereof, or data, in the same or another language, without adequate acknowledgment of the source, or justification.”
Posted: November 5, 2012
THE VIBRATION ENVIRONMENT ON THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION: ITS SIGNIFICANCE TO FLUID-BASED EXPERIMENTS
Authors: Tryggvason B.V.; Duval W.M.B.; Smith R.W.; Rezkallah K.S.; Varma S.; Redden R.F.; Herring R.A.
Acta Astronautica, Volume 48, 2001., PUBLISHER: ELSEVIER
This paper is related to the Queen’s University Experiments in Liquid Diffusion (QUELD) and contains fabricated and falsified data.
Despite clear violations of publication ethics, Elsevier and the journal involved have not yet retracted this misleading paper.
Posted: October 21, 2012
It is difficult to imagine how this Tribute can be inspiring when it is clearly misleading. MacKay's paper cited in the tribute is officially retracted because it represents "a severe abuse of the scientific publishing system."
Posted October 14, 2012
& the establishment of WBF Mackay memorial scholarship in the Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering: "holus- bolus recycling, with only minor cosmetic alterations"
In a Faculty Board meeting on October 20, 2004, Reginald W Smith gave tribute to Professor MacKay and announced that a memorial scholarship had been established in memory of Professor MacKay. Referring to two papers that he co-authored with WBF MacKay, Smith asked the Board members: how many of you will have two papers published in your ninetieth year? Some Board members were probably very impressed. The Chair indicated in the meeting that a copy of the Tribute would be placed in the University Archives. But we know now that those two papers, like many others, were nothing more than “.. holus- bolus recycling, with only minor cosmetic alterations, of material published earlier. The scale of this activity is remarkable.” [ Dr. McLatchie, Queen’s University's investigation report]
Perhaps the question in the Board meeting should have been posed differently: How many of you can publish two duplicate papers by copying and pasting old materials that were published 16 years earlier? How many of you can eliminate the original co-authors and republish the work in the Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly (CMQ)? Interestingly, the current editor of CMQ ( Professor Doug Boyd, Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Queen's University) was present in that Faculty Board meeting.
The copy of the historic Tribute that is placed in the University Archives should be corrected. It is difficult to imagine how it can be inspiring when it is clearly misleading. Old materials published in 1987 were used to manufacture two new duplicate papers in 2003 and 2004 with different titles and different authorship and were subsequently used to support a grant application. The intent to mislead is abundantly clear.
Posted: October 10, 2012
New York Times: Misconduct Widespread in Retracted Science Papers, Study Finds"
posted Oct.4, 2012
Smith & Mackay's paper published in Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly (CMQ)
“.. holus-bolus recycling, with only minor cosmetic alterations, of material published earlier. The scale of this activity is remarkable.” Dr. William McLatchie- Queen's
This is an update related to the paper published in CMQ in 2003 by Reginald W Smith and WBF MacKay which is entirely copied from another paper published more than 20 years ago. The journal stands idly by while the authors take the previously published work of a former graduate student and republish the same work under their names in CMQ.
The Journal's editor is Professor Doug Boyd, P.Eng., a colleague of Reginald W Smith , Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Despite clear violations of publication ethics and violation of the professional engineers’ code of ethics, the record is still left uncorrected. On the journal website,a video is posted and the editor talks about CMQ. Among the associate editors of CMQ responsible for the journal quality and impact factor is Dr. Mahi Sahoo with his own retracted paper and duplicate paper co-authored with Reginald W Smith:
What kind of message is CMQ sending to students about academic integrity and about P. Eng. code of ethics?
According to the journal website:
“Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly publishes original contributions on all aspects of metallurgy and materials science………..”
What original contributions?
Posted: September 29, 2012
"False positives: fraud and misconduct are threatening scientific research." by Guardian's Alok Jha :
posted: September 19, 2012
Reginald W Smith - Queen's University, Canada
J. Phys.: Condensed Matter 153855-3865 (2003, )Bing-Jian Yang, RW Smith et al , Materials Science and Microgravity Applications Group, Nicol Hall, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada
J. Appl.Phys.102, 086103 (2007), RW Smith, Materials Science and Microgravity Applications Group, Nicol Hall, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada
The authors’ affiliation in the above papers is misleading.
"Materials Science and Microgravity Application Group" is not among the entities recognized by Queen's University. The misleading affiliation should be corrected.
The allegations of affiliation misrepresentation and numerous duplicate publications were brought to the attention of the Queen’s University Officials in 2008 - 2009. At that time, they wrote: We are dealing with this issue. “We are dealing with the very essence of an academic career”
In response to the allegations of affiliation misrepresentation, the university official wrote:
“An official errata will be given to the journal by the appropriate mechanism….”
“As you are aware this is a serious allegation”
Despite all these, the university did not take any serious steps to correct the records. Many duplicated papers with bogus authorship and bogus affiliation are still not corrected. Many allegations of data falsification and data fabrication have not yet been objectively investigated by the university.
How can one have confidence in the results of the university research if records are not corrected and abuses of this scale are swept under the carpet? What sort of message are we sending to students?
posted, September15, 2012
Update: Queen's University Experiments in Liquid Diffusion (QUELD)
Queen's Data Used in NASA presentations are Falsified and Fabricated
BV Trygvason, visiting professor, University of Western Ontario
NASA Glenn Microgravity environment interpretation tutorial (MEIT):
One of the objectives of the NASA Glenn Microgravity environment interpretation tutorial (MEIT) training course is to "educate both Project Scientists (PS) and Principal Investigators (PI) about the impact the microgravity environment will have on their experiments"
All the following MEIT presentations related to the Queen's Experiments contain substantial data that are falsified and fabricated:
This is an update on the case posted earlier involving Timothy JN Smith, a member of the NSERC' Advisory Committee in Ontario.
Earlier we reported a retraction for Timothy JN Smith in Annals of NY. Acad. Sciences:
Reginald W. Smith, Xiaohe Zhu, Mark C. Tunnicliffe, Timothy J. N. Smith, Lowell Misener, and Josee Adamson. 2002. The Influence of Gravity on the Precise Measurement of Solute Diffusion Coefficients in Dilute Liquid Metals and Metalloids. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 974: 57–67.
We have now more on this to report:
This paper was retracted primarily due to duplication. It was copied from a single- author paper published in Microgravity Science &Technology in 1998. We have now found out that in fact Timothy Smith was not a contributing author in the original paper published in 1998. So, the case appears to do with bogus authorship. It looks like Timothy JN Smith was simply added to the Annals paper in 2002 by RW Smith. This is yet another example of bogus authorship where individuals are added as co-authors to previously published papers in order to inflate publication productivity. Was the financial interest in Millenium Biologix a factor in this? We don’t know yet exactly how NSERC selects individuals to serve on NSERC’s advisory committees, but according to Barbara Muir, NSERC Director for the research partnerships and regional development; “Potential candidates, who are willing to be considered, are asked to provide NSERC with a copy of their CV”
More cases of publication overlaps, involving Timothy JN Smith has come to light as a result of a search conducted by ASM International. This led ASM to include a note on its website advising potential customers that some of the papers in the CD-ROM were published in other sources.
posted: August 31, 2012
Reginald W Smith and WBF MacKay, Queens University
Queens stands idly by whileReginald W Smith and WBF MacKay take the previously published work of a former graduate student and republish the same work under their names in Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly without informing the student. More on this story: here. See what the former student says.
What kind of message is Queens sending to students about academic integrity?
How can Queen's give advice to students abut academic integrity?
For more on academic integrity in Canadian Universities, visit http://www.degradingmcgill.
Posted: August 19, 2012
Project supported by NASA/AFS Solidification Design Control Consortium (SDCC) through Auburn University.
Posted: August 17, 2012
The Relationship Between Research Misconduct and Insider Trading
We have found some striking similarities between what Smith's lawyer, Clark says about his clients duplicate papers and what Millenium Biolgix says about insider trading.
In Ottawa Citizen, Clark says that Smith mistakenly submitted the same article to the European journal, thinking Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly had rejected it. He says that it was never Smiths intention to have the paper published in both journals.
In the article by CanWest News Service, Millenium Biologix says that Smith unintentionally failed to file insider reports as required and also failed to update
information in earlier filings.
Clark is apparently unaware of more than 22 duplicated papers with bogus authorship by Smith (eight officially retracted). Interestingly, we have found out that the two papers that Clark talks about had different authors. That explains why papers were submitted to two different journals intentionally. See more about this here.
Posted: August 16,2012
University of Victoria - Herringet al.
Mat. Res. Soc. Symposium, Herring et al.
J. Japan Microgravity Appl. Herring et al.
Acta Astronautica, Tryggvason B.V.; Redden R.F.; Herring R.A.;Duval W.M.B.; Smith R.W.; Rezkallah K.S.; Varma S.
This is an update on the case below related to the University of Victoria.
We have been privately communicating with Dr. Herring (the first author) since March 15, 2006 asking him scientific questions about his conclusions in the above papers and urging him to correct the research record as the first author. These papers contain significant data that are falsified and fabricated, or as they say in private e-mails, have been"cleaned-up"
We also brought the problem to the Dean Of Engineering at UVic in 2010 (more than once) and asked him to investigate the allegations according to the established procedures.
As mentioned earlier, one the objective of this website is to demonstrate how ineffective the system is in correcting the scientific record.
posted: August 16, 2012
Rodney Herring, University of Victoria
Mat. Res. Soc. Symposium, Herring et al.
J. Japan Microgravity Appl. Herring et al.
Acta Astronautica ,Tryggvason B.V.; Redden R.F.; Herring R.A.;Duval W.M.B.; Smith R.W.; Rezkallah K.S.; Varma S.
The above articles contain significant data that are fabricated.
Fabricated data are related to the space experiments that were funded for many years by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA). The goal was to show that Canada can make extraordinary contributions to space research. The researchers involved in the project made up the data and came up with some extraordinary results to satisfy the politically driven objectives, claiming that diffusion coefficients for molten metals and semiconductors vary linearly with temperature if g-jitter is suppressed in space flights. For years, the results were promoted in multiple duplicated articles and a huge number of conference presentations, including those published and presented by Herring and colleagues.
Herring states that he was "forced to publish". Who in the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) forced Herring to publish similar papers with fabricated and falsified data? Canadian Space Agency that funded the project and UVic, Herrings current employer, are both tight-lipped about the case.
Herring may have been "forced to publish" but there is no excuse to mislead the scientific community any longer.
Posted: August 13, 2012
University of Victoria- Data Fabrication & Falsification
Letter sent to Dr. Turpin, President, U of Victoria
August 4, 2012
Reginald W Smith, Queen's University-
Timothy J.N Smith Member, NSERC Regional Offices' Advisory Committee(QUELD II furnace made by Millenium Biologix)
The following article co-authored by Timothy J.N Smith has been officially retracted:
Reginald W. Smith, Xiaohe Zhu, Mark C. Tunnicliffe, Timothy J. N. Smith, Lowell Misener, and Josee Adamson. 2002. The Influence of Gravity on the Precise Measurement of Solute Diffusion Coefficients in Dilute Liquid Metals and Metalloids. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 974: 5767.
Altogether, four papersby RW Smith et al are now officially retracted from the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
Serious experimental problems associated with QUELD II furnace were not disclosed to journal editors due to conflict of interest- Data is fabricated and falsified to make it fit the hypothesis.
The furnace used in the space research was made in collaboration with Millenium Bilogix. It turns out that Reginald W Smith and Timothy J.N. Smith did not disclose to the journal that they had financial interest in Millenium Biologix.
We have asked NSERC about the process and criteria that they use for selecting members for the regional advisory committees. We will update with anything we learn.
More than 22 duplicated papers by RW Smith et al., Queen's University; retraction movie
RW Smith, Queen's University- Fraud involving NSERC funds
Professor S.S Sadhal (conference chair) asks the editorial office at NYAS "to expunge" papers submitted by R.W. Smith (published in Microgravity Transport Processes In Fluid, Thermal, Biological... (ISBN: 9781573314237). Read the rest of this entry here.
Queen's should convene a panel to review the award of an MSc degree to a former student. Paper based on the MSc thesis is officially retracted.
Read the rest of the entry here.
More coming soon....