CSU Faculty Voice: January 15 Editorial About Our Provost's Plagiarism

Tuesday, January 14, 2014

January 15 Editorial About Our Provost's Plagiarism

The most recent editorial from the Chicago Tribune:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-did-chicago-provost-plagiarize-edit-0115-jm-20140115,0,4761404.story

2 comments:

Steve RoweJan 15, 2014, 9:03:00 AM
Given all of the evidence I have seen, Henderson clearly plagiarized and should have her Ph.D. revoked. Henderson's "work" is a violation of the plagiarism statement I put on my syllabus (at the request of CSU):

"Academic misconduct includes but is not limited to cheating, encouraging academic dishonesty, fabrication, plagiarism, bribes, favors, threats, grade tampering, non-original work, and examination by proxy. Procedures regarding academic misconduct are delineated in “Student Policies and Procedures” article X, section 2. If an incident of academic misconduct occurs, the instructor has the option to notify the student and adjust grades downward, award a failing grade for the semester, or seek further sanctions against the student.

All of the written work that you turn must be your own work, or as the Chicago State University Code of Excellence says, you should “practice personal and academic integrity.” Plagiarism occurs whenever you use someone’s else words or ideas and represent them as your own. Plagiarism includes the use of another person’s exact language or paraphrased or summarized ideas without given credit to the original author or speaker. To give proper credit to the original author or speaker, you must use complete citations – the most common way of doing this in history writing is to use footnotes. If you have questions about proper citation use or format, see me. I will penalize plagiarism with either an “F” for the assignment or an “F” in the course, at my discretion."

If Henderson submitted her "dissertation" in any of my courses, I would use the discretion I mention in the last sentence and fail her.
ReplyDelete
Replies
UnknownJan 15, 2014, 7:16:00 PM
Based JUST on what was published, any graduate student of mine would be in deep, DEEP trouble. If this is just an example of many other violations, I would personally boot that student out of the program.

I think that UIC bears a lot of responsibility here. I was requested to review the thesis of Nursing Ph.D. candidate from there some years ago, and I was stunned by the lack of quality evident in the research and the low level of the program's expectations.
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.