I reported plagiarism in a PhD, but my university ignored it
After discovering a few dodgy lines in a book, I found a PhD thesis full of ‘borrowed’ phrases – yet the cheat has faced no repercussions
Early last year, I was looking through the first book of a creative writing graduate. It was a book of poems based on their PhD, and I recognised some of the lines in it as possibly plagiarised.
Some of them came with named sources, but a handful didn’t and
clearly should have done. When I looked harder, I found chunks from
blogs and other websites, chopped up with line-breaks, no quote marks
and no acknowledgements.
Clearly, poetry written as part of a doctorate should not such show
cavalier disregard for referencing. I knew a senior lecturer in that
student’s department, so I emailed them my findings. I received an “oh
dear” acknowledgement and a chatty note to say that they were “just
heading over to the library now to check this out”.
I wish I’d headed over first. The PhD was withdrawn from the library
shelves, and soon disappeared from the university library’s catalogue.
For more than 12 months afterwards, I was unable to verify whether these
plagiarisms were also in the bound PhD thesis.
I checked with the British Library because they have rights to a
second copy and only need to ask the awarding university for it through
the Electronic Thesis Online Service (Ethos). I asked them to request
it, but the awarding university or the author said no.
My contact with the lecturer went quiet, so I made a handful of
freedom of information requests to the university, asking when the PhD
would go back into the library and if there was any sort of plagiarism
enquiry under way. In each case it took 10 days for them to reply. Each
reply would invite a follow-up question. Confidentiality needed to be
respected, they said. Could they give a time frame, I replied. No. Why
not? No answer.
After a year, I sent a very precise question: can you confirm if this
author is still entitled to use the title “Dr” with a doctorate from
your university? The university said yes. I also received an email
telling me that the PhD thesis would be going back onto the shelves that
weekend, and on to Ethos at the British Library.
I checked that Monday and found that the poems in the PhD were
presented identically to how they’d been printed in the book, with no
acknowledgment. (I’d half-dreaded that the university would give the
candidate time to add corrections as if they’d always been there).
Moreover, there was a critical component: a long essay about
contemporary poetry, comprising two-thirds of the PhD. This is the part
where candidates show their academic ability. But I found this prose
component was also rife with uncredited verbatim sentences from other
academic criticism. Sentences specifically discussing one artwork had
been cut and pasted to refer to another; sentences about an exhibition
of painting were applied to an anthology of poems; sentences about the
specifics of one poem inspired by jazz were transposed to discuss a poem
by a completely different author. It was waffle.
I vetted the thesis and found that it had 75 pages with uncredited
verbatim sentences, often more than one per page. Sometimes they were
from items cited in the bibliography, suggesting amateur citation skills
– cut and paste instead of paraphrase (even though the candidate knew
full well to use quote marks when quoting elsewhere in the thesis). On
at least 10 occasions sentences were from items not cited in the
bibliography at all, but from academic articles and reviews. You could
make a case for postmodern ghosting in creative writing, but copying
verbatim sentences from uncredited sources in a critical analysis is
simply academic plagiarism.
I wonder what will happen if I report these latest findings. Will the
university remove the bound thesis from the shelves, and deny
permission to the British Library for use of its copy? Will it
investigate? Will it stall its response again?
This PhD sets a precedent that suggests other candidates would not
have their doctorates stripped from them for using multiple uncredited
texts in their creative writing. This also sets a precedent that a PhD
with nearly a 100 verbatim borrowings in its critical writing does not
lead to the removal of the doctorate from the doctor. Once it’s passed,
it’s passed.
This creates a legal minefield, one that other universities should be concerned about.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário