Go to original

Purdue punishes professor
By Brian Wallheimer
The [Lafayette, Indiana] Journal and Courier

Thursday, August 28, 2008

Misconduct ruling upheld; he decries 'witch hunt,' 'insult'

Purdue University scientist Rusi Taleyarkhan vowed to continue his fight against research misconduct findings against him after an appeals committee upheld his guilt Wednesday.

In front of a Journal & Courier reporter, Taleyarkhan opened a package from Purdue Provost Randy Woodson that contained the appeals committee decision and the sanctions.

"This was a witch hunt," Taleyarkhan said, after opening the documents in the office of Vincent Bralts, interim head of the Department of Nuclear Engineering, who delivered the package for Woodson. "This was a foregone conclusion."

Woodson's letter, dated Wednesday, informed Taleyarkhan that he would lose his named professorship and be limited in his mentoring duties with graduate students. He will still be a tenured professor at the university.

"In my judgment as Purdue's chief academic officer, it is inappropriate for a faculty member who has been found guilty of research misconduct to hold the title of a Named University Professor," Woodson wrote. "Therefore, I am removing the designation of Arden L. Bement, Jr. Professor of Nuclear Engineering from your title as of this date. All rights and privileges associated with this distinction, including the allocation of discretionary resources, are hereby withdrawn."

The sanctions followed a series of events, starting when Taleyarkhan claimed he achieved "bubble fusion," a process that uses sound waves to create rapidly collapsing bubbles in a liquid solution. If the nuclear science proves true, it could become a cheap, clean source of limitless energy.

But critics cried foul and several accused Taleyarkhan of research misconduct. An inquiry committee, convened by Purdue, didn't find enough evidence to warrant further investigation in 2006.

But a later inquiry on new charges brought on an investigation that found Taleyarkhan guilty this year. The second inquiry was spurred by new allegations and a congressional committee that chastised Purdue for its handling of the initial inquiry. The first inquiry found Taleyarkhan had abused his power as a professor but didn't commit misconduct.

Congress got involved because federal funding had been used in the testing of bubble fusion.

The investigation said Taleyarkhan included a student's name on a paper submitted to a journal even though the student wasn't involved in the research. Taleyarkhan also was found to have told another journal that other scientists independently verified his research conclusions even though he was involved in their experiments.

In the appeal, Taleyarkhan claimed that crucial evidence had been withheld, findings were based on presumptions rather than fact and that an attorney working for Purdue threatened Taleyarkhan, among other grounds. The appeals committee found no basis to overturn the guilty findings.

Taleyarkhan said the loss of his named professorship will cost him about $10,000 per year in salary. He said the loss of discretionary funds will be about $25,000, which is used to start new research and other projects.

Taleyarkhan also will be limited in his work with graduate students for at least three years. He will be monitored in his work with them and will not be allowed to serve as major professor or co-major professor to them.

"This is an insult to the core," Taleyarkhan said. "This is basically taking away your rights as a professor."

John Lewis, Taleyarkhan's attorney, said the researcher will appeal the sanction and that he'll likely file a lawsuit over the matter.

Lewis and Taleyarkhan said Bralts asked Taleyarkhan to meet with him Wednesday about an accounts issue. When Taleyarkhan showed up, he said Bralts handed him a folder that contained the appeal decision and the sanction letter from Woodson.

"This is going to likely end up in civil court because of the handling of this by Purdue administration culminating today in a meeting where Dr. Taleyarkhan was not allowed counsel and not told the real reason for the meeting," Lewis said Wednesday. "There is an enormous amount of information going forward that will not look good for Purdue on how it treats its faculty."

Bralts said he did ask for a meeting with Taleyarkhan. He declined to tell the Journal & Courier what he told Taleyarkhan the meeting was about.

Purdue spokeswoman Jeanne Norberg said Woodson asked Bralts to deliver the letter but did not specify how it should be done.

"Dr. Bralts, who is the head of the Department of Nuclear Engineering, is Dr. Taleyarkhan's direct superior. As department head, Bralts was the appropriate person to deliver the letter," Norberg said. "No further action or discussion was required. Since the action was merely the delivery of a letter, there was no need for the presence of legal counsel."

Taleyarkhan earlier this year filed a lawsuit against two Purdue professors who have been detractors of his work, claiming they are trying to ruin his reputation.

C.K. Gunsalus, University of Illinois special counsel and an expert in research ethics, said she doesn't understand why the investigation didn't get to the core of the matter -- whether Taleyarkhan fabricated data, something he'd been accused of.

"It appears to me there are some large unanswered questions. The committee probably received some advice not to answer them," Gunsalus said. "It's a disservice to him, and it's a disservice to the research community. The institution is clearly trying to get this behind them."

Kenneth Pimple, director of Teaching Research Ethics Programs at the Poynter Center at Indiana University, said that while many were critical of the way Purdue handled earlier proceedings, he thought it had followed its rules well this time.

"The report from Purdue looked to me like it had a very conscientious process and a lot of evidence to support it," Pimple said. 

(In accordance with Title 17, Section 107, of the U.S. Code, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. New Energy Times has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of the original text in this article; nor is New Energy Times endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

"Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on New Energy Times may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links.