The Breaking of the Sichuan University Professor Scandal

In early 2026, the academic community in China was rocked by a bold collective action from graduate students at one of the nation's top institutions. Sichuan University, a prestigious Double First-Class university located in Chengdu, found itself at the center of controversy when multiple master's and PhD students from the research group of Professor Wang Zhuqing publicly denounced their supervisor. This real-name report, a meticulously compiled 83-page PDF document filled with screenshots, emails, meeting recordings, and other evidence, laid bare allegations spanning academic integrity breaches, financial improprieties, ethical lapses in mentorship, and even questionable ideological stances. The incident underscores the precarious power dynamics in Chinese graduate programs, where PhD supervisors hold immense sway over students' futures.

The report surfaced around January 16, 2026, after students' internal attempts to switch advisors failed due to lack of institutional support. Two PhD candidates had already sought mentor changes citing intolerable conditions, highlighting a pattern of desperation that culminated in this public exposé. As news spread rapidly across platforms like Weibo and Zhihu, it ignited nationwide discussions on higher education accountability, drawing parallels to previous scandals and amplifying calls for systemic reform.

Who is Professor Wang Zhuqing?

Wang Zhuqing, born around the early 1980s, boasts an impressive resume on paper that exemplifies China's aggressive talent importation strategy. He earned his bachelor's and master's degrees in Mechanical Design, Manufacturing, and Automation from Dalian University of Technology before pursuing a PhD in Engineering at Yamanashi University in Japan, graduating in 2011. Following his doctorate, Wang spent nearly 15 years in Japan, holding positions such as researcher at Kyoto University Graduate School of Engineering, materials science researcher at the University of Fukui (Northland Advanced Science and Technology Graduate University), assistant professor at Tohoku Gakuin University and Tohoku University Graduate School of Engineering's industry-academia collaboration special researcher.

In January 2021, Wang returned to China as part of Sichuan University's overseas recruitment drive, appointed as a specially appointed researcher (特聘研究员) and PhD supervisor in the Mechanical Engineering College. He leads the overseas-recruited Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (MEMS) characteristic team, directs the Sichuan University MEMS and Intelligent Sensing Innovation Center, serves as an independent Principal Investigator (PI) professor for 'Medicine + Manufacturing' at West China Hospital, and holds titles like Sichuan Province Tianfu Emei Plan 'Innovation Leading Talent.' His research focuses on MEMS medical devices, sensors, and nanotechnology, with over 136 publications cited more than 1,120 times on platforms like ResearchGate and Google Scholar. Projects under his name total around 20 million RMB in funding.

Despite this pedigree, students allege that his leadership style and practices deviated sharply from the ethical standards expected of a tenured professor guiding the next generation of engineers.

Academic Misconduct: Fabricated Data and Recycled Research

At the heart of the allegations lie claims of severe academic dishonesty, a plague that has plagued Chinese higher education for years. Students accuse Wang of authoring or co-authoring at least 28 papers post his SCU appointment with issues like one-man-multiple-submissions (一稿多投), where the same work is submitted to multiple journals simultaneously or sequentially without disclosure; duplicated data across publications; outright fabrication lacking raw experimental data; and forcing students to invent experimental processes, tamper with test results, and craft false conclusions to secure third-party evaluation reports.

A glaring example cited is Wang repurposing his 2016 Japanese research on a 'suspended microfluidic thermocouple biosensor' into multiple post-2021 publications, splitting and recycling results without new contributions. Students claim no original data exists for many projects, with Wang pressuring them to backdate or fabricate logs to meet publication quotas essential for his promotions and funding renewals. This mirrors broader trends: in 2026, China's National Natural Science Foundation (NSFC) announced its first batch of 46 academic misconduct cases, including plagiarism and fabrication, signaling heightened scrutiny amid international retractions of Chinese papers exceeding 10,000 annually in recent years.

• One-paper-multi-submissions violating journal ethics codes.
• Absence of raw data, replaced by coerced fabrications.
• Repackaging old foreign work as novel SCU outputs.
• Manipulation for funding and evaluation metrics.

Such practices not only erode trust in published science but jeopardize collaborative international research, particularly in sensitive fields like MEMS with dual-use potential.

Financial Irregularities: Misuse of Research Funds

Financial malfeasance forms another pillar of the complaint, with students detailing how Wang allegedly treated national research grants as personal coffers. Key accusations include diverting conference registration fees—sometimes thousands of RMB per student—directly to his personal accounts under conference-hosting pretexts; using project funds to repay personal housing loans; operating a company under his name riddled with fiscal red flags; and evading taxes via fake wage payments to proxies.

One provocative quote attributed to Wang during confrontations: 'If push comes to shove, sell the house in China, take a few million in funds back to Japan—there it exchanges for even more.' This, per recordings, underscores a cavalier attitude toward public money. In context, China's research funding has ballooned, with universities like SCU receiving billions annually, but oversight lags: NSFC reports show misuse in 20% of audited projects. Students, often footing bills from stipends, felt doubly exploited.

The implications ripple: eroded public trust in science funding, potential legal violations under China's revised Research Misconduct Regulations (2024), and distorted innovation priorities.

Master-Student Power Imbalance: Ethical Violations and Abuse

Perhaps most harrowing are the personal testimonies of mentorship abuse, where Wang allegedly wielded his authority ruthlessly. Students describe verbal assaults, psychological manipulation (PUA tactics), threats of graduation delays (延毕), or outright industry blacklisting to silence dissent. Class lectures veered into irrelevant territories, with forced labor in labs exceeding safe formaldehyde levels ignored for safety pleas.

In China's 'master-apprentice' (师徒制) graduate model, supervisors control thesis approvals, recommendations, and publications—giving them god-like power. This scandal exposes how such dynamics foster toxicity: two PhDs sought transfers pre-report, citing health and mental strain. Broader stats reveal 30% of Chinese grad students report mentor dissatisfaction per 2025 surveys, fueling 'rat race' (内卷) burnout.

• Threats: 'Delay your graduation or blacklist you forever.'
• Hazards: Labs with excessive VOCs (volatile organic compounds) like formaldehyde.
• Manipulation: Gaslighting to extract unpaid overtime.

For prospective students, this serves as a stark reminder: vet advisors thoroughly via peers and platforms like Rate My Professor.

Photo by Fotos on Unsplash

Ideological Concerns: Pro-Japan Sentiments Under Scrutiny

Adding a political layer, students flagged Wang's alleged pro-Japan bias, rooted in his long Japanese tenure and purported permanent residency there. Examples include scheduling a China-Japan-Korea conference opening on September 18—Mukden Incident anniversary—despite objections; forwarding group messages extolling 'Japanese spirit'; criticizing patriotic faculty/students; and prioritizing Taiwan-hosted MEMS events.

In China's hyper-nationalist academic climate, post-2020 talent repatriation emphasizes loyalty. While unproven, these claims amplify scrutiny, echoing cases where ideological vetting derailed careers. Wang reportedly filed defamation police reports, escalating tensions.

Sichuan University's Swift Response and Ongoing Investigation

On February 6, 2026, SCU's Personnel Department issued a terse bulletin: 'The university attaches great importance, has formed a task force, and initiated investigation procedures per regulations. If substantiated, severe handling without leniency to uphold a clean educational environment.' This mirrors standard protocol under Ministry of Education guidelines, but public demands transparency—full verification, accountability chains, and result publication.

SCU, with 70,000+ students and top engineering rankings, faces reputational risk amid China's zero-tolerance academic purity drive.

Broader Context: Academic Scandals in Chinese Higher Education

This isn't isolated. 2026 NSFC's first bulletin penalized 46 for similar issues; cumulative retractions hit record highs. Double First-Class universities report 15% misconduct rates per audits. Factors: metric-driven promotions (papers=funding), weak oversight, opaque funding trails.

Cases like 2025 Peking U fabrication ring parallel, prompting reforms: AI plagiarism detectors, fund trackers, whistleblower protections. Yet, student fear persists due to retaliation risks.

Stakeholder Perspectives: Students, Experts, and Peers

Students frame it as self-preservation after exhaustion; experts like Sciencenet commentators call for 'mentor credit files'; netizens decry 'academic facade tears.' Peers urge caution, noting unverified claims, but applaud courage amid power asymmetries.

For international observers, it spotlights China's STEM talent wars—import stars, export integrity woes?

Implications and Future Outlook for Graduate Education

Short-term: Probe outcomes could strip titles/funding. Long-term: Accelerate reforms like dual-mentorship, anonymous reporting, ethics training. Positive: Heightens awareness, empowering students via unions or apps.

Job seekers: Explore ethical environments via higher ed jobs listings or career advice. Institutions must prioritize welfare to retain talent.

Photo by Fotos on Unsplash

Actionable Advice: Protecting Yourself in Grad School

Aspiring PhDs: Research advisors deeply—publications, student testimonials, lab visits. Document interactions; seek departmental ombudsmen early. Institutions: Implement annual ethics audits, fund audits, student feedback loops.

• Visit labs pre-enrollment.
• Use professor rating sites.
• Build peer networks for support.
• Report via official channels first.

This scandal, while troubling, catalyzes progress toward ethical higher ed.