Ulster University( UU) has intimately apologised to two academics behind exploration on the cost of Northern Ireland's disunited education system.
The exploration had claimed the separate academy system cost£ 226m redundant a time to the public bag.
The university is also renouncing a former statement which asked for its totem to be removed from the report.
Vice-chancellor Prof Paul Bartholomew has now said that former statement" is not compatible with my views".
The Cost of Division exploration estimated the total price of division and duplication of services in education in Northern Ireland at about£ 600,000 a day.
It examined the cost of effects similar as fresh academy transport due to isolation and academic selection, separate seminaries in an area, and the plutocrat spent on programmes to bring children educated independently together.
The exploration, which was the rearmost in a series of UU papers on Northern Ireland's education system, was incompletely funded by the Integrated Education Fund( IEF) and published with Ulster University's totem.
Dr Stephen Roulston and Dr Matt Milliken were the authors of the exploration report.
In an unusual move, the Department of Education latterly criticised it, calling it" defective and over simplified".
Ulster University also issued a statement which said that the exploration report was" not reflective of the views of the university".
" While we support the right and freedom of academics to publish reports similar as these, we've requested that the incorrect use of the university's totem is remedied through its junking from this report," UU said in a statement to BBC News NI on 23 May.
But UU'svice-chancellor Prof Bartholomew has now repudiated that former statement and made a public reason to the two academics.
In a statement to BBC News NI, Prof Bartholomew said that" Asvice-chancellor of Ulster University, I'm renouncing this university statement as it isn't compatible with my views as principal academic officer of the institution.
" I'm now making a public reason, on behalf of the university, to the authors of the paper- Stephen Roulston and Matt Milliken- for the institution having made this statement," he continued.
" The university supports all its academics' right to publish their views as long as they aren't in direct contradiction of the university's introductory values and there was clearly no similar pressure with this paper.
" I understand that the position taken in this publication may be controversial, or uncomfortable for some, but that's an entirely licit part of academic converse, and it's clearly not for the university to take a particular view on the graces of individual papers.
" Rather, it's important that academic institutions give a neutral, but robust, terrain to grease the product, discussion, and elaboration of knowledge."
Prof Bartholomew also said that UU would host a public forum at which the findings of the exploration paper would be bandied.
We hope the matter can be laid to rest'
Dr Milliken told BBC News NI that both he and Dr Roulston" welcome this retraction and the fulsome reason made by thevice-chancellor".
" In all of the 18 Transforming Education papers published to date we've always used robust, academic styles to shine a light on confines of the education system then that some would prefer to keep in the dark," he said.
" We unfeignedly hope that this matter can now be laid to rest and that discussion can formerly again concentrate on the programs, practices and procedures that maintain our socially and financially expensive segregated system of training.
" In the words of our most recent paper on the Cost of Division' The question isn't Can we go to address this?'
" Rather it should be' Can we really go not to?'"