CSU Faculty Voice: Dissertation Plagiarism Part 3: Don't Forget Wikipedia

Saturday, January 25, 2014

Dissertation Plagiarism Part 3: Don't Forget Wikipedia

For my next installment, I offer the kind of plagiarism that we generally see from our undergraduates. On page 11 of her dissertation, Henderson offers the following:

While the material beginning with "this addition was made . . ." appears on several internet sites, I'm sure that all of us have experienced the undergraduate plagiarists sophisticated reliance on the first site that pops up. In the case of this material, it happens to be Wikipedia, that proven source of scholarly material. The material from Henderson's dissertation appears in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_reasoned_action. You will note that in the Wikipedia article, the anonymous author actually accurately references the material from this source: Katherine Miller, Communications Theories: Prospectives, Processes and Contexts, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004). The quotation cited in Wikipedia and plagiarized by Henderson appears on p. 127 of Miller's book:

I think further comment on this version of plagiarism is unnecessary.

4 comments:

kajJan 25, 2014, 6:16:00 AM
This is astounding and utterly embarrassing- for her. When will the supposed scholar step down to prevent further embarrassment and detriment to the university?
ReplyDelete
Replies
R. BennyJan 25, 2014, 11:20:00 AM
It is hard to understand what Watson might mean by his use of the word "alleged" in the context of Angela Henderson's plagiarized dissertation. The evidence is right there in the pages she submitted as her work. Dissertations are always published, either printed, bound and placed in the university library or published online or both. The point of research and scholarship is the publication of one's work with the understanding that one's peers will read it and respond. What possible objection could Ms. Henderson have to having her dissertation read carefully and thoroughly responded to by an experienced researcher and scholar.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

Thanks to Haki Madhabuti

"1. He/she must be a scholar of national note, with significant peer review publications and books in his or her field. There must be no doubt as to his/her standing in the community of scholars. This would also include a history of the candidate’s participation in the appropriate professional organizations.

2. He/she must have served with distinction as the administrative head of a major unit within an institution of higher learning or at the important position of Provost and/or Dean. Of course, prior service at the presidential level is preferred.

3. He/she must have a documented history of raising significant monies from the private and public sectors. At most major and research one universities it is not unusual to expect the president to come with a plan to raise in excess of half a billion dollars or more in the first few years.

4. The prospective president must have a consensus buy-in from the faculty, students, administration and staff, therefore, arriving with a unity mandate to lead by joining a University community that has bought into his or her vision for the future."

From an open letter to the CSU Community, 2009.