Correct scientific working methods
Honesty is one of the main foundations of scientific practice. Honesty or probity in science means separating your own ideas and thoughts from those originating from other people, and making this clear in written and pictorial reports documents and oral presentations. This also shows the requisite respect towards authors’ rights. However, the right to cite others exists; and proper citation is part of the toolkit of everyone conducting scientific work.
This page points to further information about plagiarism and avoiding falling into this trap. The library at Kempten University of Applied Sciences stocks a large selection of works on this subject, aimed at helping you to attribute citations and reference your work correctly. There is also a link to the ombuds system for good scientific practice in Germany.
Furthermore, Kempten University of Applied Sciences provides its own Guidelines to ensure good scientific practice and on handling scientific misconduct.
Resources
Websites
- A comprehensive information pack on the subject of plagiarism is available from the “Refairenz” project conducted by the University of Konstanz, HTWG Konstanz – University of Applied Sciences, and Freiburg University of Education: https://www.plagiatspraevention.uni-konstanz.de/en/
- Online resource “Research Integrity” run by the German Research Foundation (DFG): https://wissenschaftliche-integritaet.de/en/
- General information about plagiarism – “Plagiarism Portal” by Professor Deborah Weber-Wulff (HTW Berlin): https://wissenschaftliche-integritaet.de/en/
Reading list
Here are some works about scientific research methods that we stock in the the library or can be accessed as eBooks:
- Brink, A. (2013): Anfertigung wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten. Ein prozessorientierter Leitfaden zur Erstellung von Bachelor- Master- und Diplomarbeiten. Springer, Wiesbaden
- Berger-Grabner, D. (2016). Wissenschaftliches Arbeiten in den Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften. Springer Fachmedien (also available in eBook format)
- Disterer, Georg (2014). Studienarbeiten schreiben – Seminar-, Bachelor-, Master- und Diplomarbeiten in den Wirtschaftswissenschaften, 7th ed., Springer, Berlin Heidelberg
- Lück, Wolfgang, Henke, Michael (2014): Technik des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens – Seminararbeit, Diplomarbeit, Dissertation, 10th ed., De Gruyter Oldenbourg, Munich
- Rossig, Wolfram, Prätsch, Joachim (2010): Leitfaden für Haus-, Seminararbeiten, Bachelor- und Masterthesis, Diplom- und Magisterarbeiten, Dissertationen. 8th ed., Print-TEC Druck & Verlag, Bremen
- Sandberg, B. (2017). Wissenschaftliches Arbeiten von Abbildung bis Zitat. De Gruyter Oldenbourg, München
- Schöneck, Nadine, Voss, Werner (2013): Das Forschungsprojekt. Planung, Durchführung, Auswertung, Springer, Wiesbaden
- Theisen, M. R. (2013). Wissenschaftliches Arbeiten. Verlag Franz Vahlen, Munich
Ombudsperson and Ombuds Committee
In order to safeguard good academic practice, a system of self-regulation has been established in the German academic system in the form of ombuds committees. At Kempten UAS, a local, neutral person of trust/contact (ombudsperson) is appointed whom members of Kempten UAS can approach confidentially regarding matters of good scientific practice or suspected scientific misconduct.
The right of members and affiliates of an academic institution to choose whether to contact the ombudsperson, their deputy or the supra-regional “German Research Ombudsman” remains unaffected and emphasises the basic principle of neutrality in consultations and conflict mediation.
Tasks
As a person of trust, the ombudsperson advises anyone who informs them of suspected scientific misconduct and picks up on any relevant information of which they become aware (possibly via third parties) on their own initiative. They examine how concrete and significant the plausibility of the allegations is, the possible motives, and whether they can be dispelled. Scientific misconduct is deemed to have occurred if, in a scientifically relevant context, false statements are made deliberately or through gross negligence, the intellectual property of others is infringed, or their research activities are otherwise impaired. The circumstances of each individual case are decisive.
The ombudsperson shall forward allegations of scientific misconduct to the Ombuds Committee appointed by university management, which shall investigate the matter, while maintaining confidentiality to protect the informant and those affected.
University management appoints a standing committee to investigate allegations of academic misconduct, objectively assess the facts of the case and return appropriate recommendations. The committee is activated at the request of the ombudsperson or one of its members.
The Ombudsperson for Academic Integrity offers advice to anyone wishing to report signs of academic misconduct, as well as to anyone subject to any such allegations. They check the validity and relevance of the facts for each reported suspicion – and if there are justified concerns, they forward the information to the Ombuds Committee. They always act discreetly and confidentially.
University management appoints a standing committee to investigate allegations of academic misconduct, to objectively assess the facts of the case and to return appropriate recommendations.
Responsibility
- The ombudsperson forwards allegations of academic misconduct to the committee appointed by the university management, which investigates the matter, while maintaining confidentiality to protect the informant and those affected.
- The ombudsperson is responsible for upholding the integrity and honesty of academic activities and helping to ensure that allegations of academic misconduct are dealt with correctly and fairly.
Basic principles of the German ombuds system
“Homepage: Good research practice” published by the DFG, including information about the ombuds system in Germany:
https://www.dfg.de/en/research_funding/principles_dfg_funding/good_scientific_practice/index.html
