Stanford University President Marc Tessier-Lavigne (C) said Wednesday he will resign after a report cleared him of data manipulation misconduct in papers he wrote or co-wrote. The investigation cleared him of data fraud but he said he will resign for the good of the university.
Photo courtesy of Marc Tessier-Lavigne FacebookJuly 19 (UPI) — Stanford University President Marc Tessier-Lavigne said Wednesday he would resign after a report on a misconduct investigation cleared him of falsifying research data.
“I am gratified that the panel concluded I did not engage in any fraud or falsification of scientific data. Although the report clearly refutes the allegations of fraud and misconduct that were made against me, for the good of the university, I have made the decision to step down as president effective August 31,” Tessier-Lavigne said in a statement.
He has repeatedly and consistently denied the allegations that he knew about data manipulations in some of the papers he co-wrote.
A review of the allegations was launched by the university’s board of trustees in December.
Tessier-Lavigne acknowledged in his statement that the panel’s report identified some areas where he should have done better regarding the twelve papers reviewed.
“Specifically, the report discusses steps I took to address issues that arose with some publications. I agree that in some instances I should have been more diligent when seeking corrections, and I regret that I was not,” he said. “The panel’s review also identified instances of manipulation of research data by others in my lab. Although I was unaware of these issues, I want to be clear that I take responsibility for the work of my lab members.”
Tessier-Lavigne said the Board of Trustees had accepted that a leadership transition in time for the start of the next school year is “the best course of action.”
He said he would remain on the Stanford faculty.
And he said it’s clear that information uncovered by the investigative panel means he will be required to retract three papers co-authored by him and correct two others.
“The panel concluded I had no knowledge of the data manipulation before any of these papers were published or, indeed, until recently, and that it would not have been reasonable to expect me to have detected it at the time,” he said in his Wednesday statement.
