Why Graduate Student A Visits the ATM at the End of Every Month [Reading Science]

Laboratory data photo. Not related to the article.

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Bong-su] Graduate student A, majoring in science and engineering in the Seoul metropolitan area, visits the ATM in front of the student union building at the end of every month. This is because he needs to withdraw 'cash' to pay the 'lab fee.' It was when he first joined a research project team after entering graduate school. He was happily contemplating how to spend the monthly salary of 1 million won he received. However, the senior in charge of the lab called him and instructed him to withdraw 400,000 won in cash from the monthly salary deposited into his bank account and pay it as a lab fee. A said, "It was a bit absurd, but everyone was paying, and the senior lab leader said it was 'money spent for you all,' such as for dinners, snacks, and coffee. I was sure there must be funds allocated from the research budget for such expenses, so I couldn't understand why it had to be deducted from my salary, but I had no choice."

A’s case is the most common and malicious form of research fraud called 'joint management of student labor costs.' As cases of being caught and punished for managing funds in accounts have increased, the method has 'evolved' to collecting cash to leave no 'trace.'

This is a 'backward' scene occurring in labs leading social development through advanced technology research. "Such things still happen in the 21st century," it may be hard to understand at first glance. However, such research fraud is very common in Korean society. As of October last year, there were 85 cases detected by the National Research Foundation of Korea over the past five years. The number has been increasing, from 15 cases in 2017 and 2018 to 22 in 2019, and 16 as of September 2020. It is widespread in frontline labs, and more cases are being revealed as crackdowns intensify.

So why are these incidents happening? First, the overwhelming power of professors within labs is cited. In labs where professors hold all authority over papers, grades, graduation, and personnel, resisting or speaking out is tantamount to a 'death sentence.' In particularly severe cases, some fields demand absolute loyalty, saying that only by pleasing the professor can one get a job or survive in the industry.

The abuse of power by professors exploiting this is serious. A representative case is Professor Lee from Jeonbuk National University, who was indicted in April. He entrusted a Mongolian doctoral student to take his child to the hospital three times a week, and when the student did not obey, he threw socks at him and verbally abused him without hesitation. After having the student open a bank account, he embezzled labor costs and collected pocket money from students during master's thesis reviews. He also frequently stole students' theses by adding his brother's and sister's names to them. This background has led to calls for institutional reforms where society and schools intervene to disperse professors' absolute power in labs and protect students' rights, rather than leaving it to individual students' decisions.

The lukewarm attitude of the government and schools is also criticized for encouraging such fraud. In the case of Jeonbuk National University, despite the professor’s abuses being known, the investigation and protection of victim students were neglected due to reasons such as the statute of limitations on disciplinary action for public officials. So much so that 14 fellow professors from the same department stepped forward demanding swift action, saying "the victim students are shedding tears of blood."

The government outwardly proclaims 'strict handling,' but there are signs of regression. The regressive behavior of the newly established Researcher Rights Protection Committee under the National Research and Development Innovation Act, enacted in February, is a case in point. Over about three months, the committee reviewed 26 appeals against disciplinary actions for research fraud, and decided to reduce penalties in 19 cases (73.1%). More than half of these were joint management of student labor costs (13 out of 26), where instead of full recovery of labor costs, only the jointly managed portion was recovered, thus mitigating the punishment. Of the committee’s 96 members, 60% are established researchers such as university professors, with the rest being legal and accounting experts and senior officials, but not a single student researcher?the group most affected by research fraud?is included. There is no way to prevent conflicts of interest such as academic ties influencing decisions.

Currently, our society has no hope other than the advancement of science and technology. To address imminent issues like climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic and to ensure sustainable human life, science and technology are the only solutions. However, student researchers, who are at the forefront of scientific advancement, are trapped in 19th-century 'apprenticeship-style' labs and are suffering. Wouldn’t humanity have hope if we liberate them and create a 21st-century 'equal' lab culture?