February 25, 2008

'New York Post' Deems Columbia U.'s Handling of Plagiarism Case 'Contemptible'

It’s rare that accusations of scholarly misconduct merit attention from New York City tabloids. But the case of Madonna G. Constantine, a Columbia University professor, is not your average plagiarism kerfuffle.

A law firm hired by Columbia found that Ms. Constantine had borrowed the work of two former students and a former colleague. The university asked her to resign (she declined) and then cut her salary. Ms. Constantine, who asserts there is a conspiracy against her, says that someone at Teachers College hung a noose outside her office door in October.

In an editorial with the headline “Contemptible Columbia,” the New York Post weighed in on the controversy:

By retaining Constantine as a tenured professor, and by keeping the alleged “sanctions” applied against her secret, Teachers has demonstrated that it cares as little about its reputation as Columbia cares about its own.

A columnist for Newsday doesn’t seem to buy Ms. Constantine’s claim that she’s a victim:

If Constantine is such a victim, how did she get to be a full professor, with tenure, the head of an annual conference, and the former chair of her department?

Read The Chronicle’s coverage of the case here and here. —Thomas Bartlett

Comments

1. It’s not rare for the New York Post to take potshots at Columbia whenever the opportunity to do so presents itself; the NY Sun is even more eager to do so. Both papers have very conservative editorial boards and write about the (admittedly liberal) Columbia faculty and administration as if they were threats to the fabric of American society. That TC is a separate (admittedly liberal) entity has not prevented the Post’s editorial board from using this incident as an excuse to bring up other incidents that occurred at Columbia proper.

   So what is the Post’s complaint this time? That Constantine wasn’t fired. There isn’t enough information available to the public for anyone to really say whether dismissal would be appropriate unless one takes the position that all plagiarism cases are created equal (they’re not; for example, many instances of plagiarism are merely careless and not intentional) and all deserve the same drastic response. Given that the Post also doesn’t know how serious the actual sanctions TC imposed really are, it is in no position to proclaim them inadequate.

   — CU Alum    Feb 25, 03:30 PM    #

2. A headline I’d love to see: World deems New York Post’s grasp on reality “contemptible”.

   — Aaron    Feb 25, 03:33 PM    #

3. Given the sheer volume of the plagiarism (two dozen instances) it’s hard to argue this was accidental.

   — Gerard Harbison, UNL    Feb 25, 03:48 PM    #

4. The denial of the plagiarism and the ultimate blame on racism make me sick! She could have coauthored those papers with her graduate students. Constantine ought to learn to credit her students for their work!

   — OAO    Feb 25, 04:22 PM    #

5. “How did she get to be a full professor, etc.” ? Affirmative Discrimination, of course.

   — Jeffrey M. Duban    Feb 25, 04:38 PM    #

6. Intent is not and should not be a consideration in defining plagiarism, any more than it is or should be in defining drunk driving. The work is either purloined (sorry, Chronicle, not “borrowed”) from another source or it is not. If Prof. Constantine is guilty of plagiarism, she should not be teaching at Teachers’ College, or anywhere else. Inasmuch as Constantine is reportedly claiming that the graduate students in question actually plagiarised the materials in question from her (although she has declined to explain how each of them separately might have gained access to what she claims to have been her then-unpublished work), she seems an especially undeserving candidate for anyone’s sympathy.

   — Gustave    Feb 25, 04:42 PM    #

7. As another posting points out, the NY Post Editorial Board is always looking to satisfy its conservative readers. I believe they had a problem with their Page 6 organizer a few months ago.

   That being said, I strongly feel that plagiarism cases are handled too delicately by college administrators. The law firm apparently felt there was sufficient evidence to warrant Columbia asking her to resign and when she refused, Columbia cut her salary.

   How will students interpret this? Will they get an F or be expelled for plagiarism? Will they feel there are two standards? Of course, if the salary reduction is significant, the action taken may be appropriate.

   — John    Feb 25, 04:46 PM    #

8. Whether or not the charges are valid; whether or not Prof. Constantine’s defense is plausible; whether or not TC has acted too slowly, too hastily, too boldly, or too openly, the remarkable facet of this case is that TC hired outside counsel to handle the accusations. Ordinarily a committee of Prof. Constantine’s peers would have reviewed all the evidence, including the testimony of all parties. One has to ask what motivated the administration of TC to go out of house. One can only speculate from the reporting in the NYT and the CHE that someone was threatening to sue TC or its administrators. Then only would the expense (and it could not have been negligible) of hiring a lawfirm to investigate and report its findings make sense. One wonders if this is the harbinger of the future: threatened with lawsuits by those of its own faculty colleges and universities will abrogate their own responsibility to investigate and report findings of alleged misconduct, and turn to the legal profession.

   — peter hoffer    Feb 25, 04:58 PM    #

9. Last year Prof. Constantine initiated a defamation lawsuit against the professor who succeeded her as department chair. Therein, I imagine, lies the source of the perceived need for legal assistance.

   — Gustave    Feb 25, 05:50 PM    #

10. Just to clarify, I did not claim that inadvertant plagiarism should be excused. All I said was that some plagiarism cases are more serious than others. I mentioned intentional vs. unintentional plagiarism merely as an example. Unintentional plagiarism should still result in sanctions, but the sanctions should be less severe than they would have been had the plagiarism been intentional.

    I also did not say that Prof. Constantine actually plagiarized unintentionally. My sense is that she acted deliberately, but I don’t know one way or the other. Here again, I was merely illustrating a point and not discussing the specifics of this case.

    — CU Alum    Feb 25, 05:58 PM    #

11. If a newspaper reporter did what Ms. Constantine is alleged to have done, the reporter would be fired within 24 hours. For some reason, we high-minded academics are much more willing to tolerate such conduct (except when the plagiarist is a student). At least Columbia didn’t sweep this case under the rug, even if its sanctions have been inexplicably tepid.

    — jutland    Feb 25, 06:26 PM    #

12. jutland —

    Newspaper reporters don’t have tenure. What would be appropriate in that context is not necessarily appropriate here.

    Tenured professors can be fired for misconduct, but not all misconduct is serious enough to call for such a punishment. Since we don’t know all the facts, we can’t really say how severely TC should have sanctioned Prof. Constantine.

    — CU Alum    Feb 25, 06:32 PM    #

13. Ever notice how bad news, acrimony and controversy seem to follow some people around like a bad perfume? Why is that?

    — marci    Feb 25, 07:47 PM    #

14. 1. There is no such thing as unintentional plagiarism (we cannot assume that a professor in question is a complete idiot, even if this is admitted).
    2. However, there could be accidental plagiarism (accidentally omitting reference), but in this case (as in the case of claiming unintentional plagiarism) there must be immediate declaration returning the ideas, etc. to the rightful author. Naturally, the situation where unintentional/accidental plagiarism is claimed as defence, but there is no apology, is not sustainable.
    3. There could be also appearance of plagiarism when the author had no knowledge of previous work. In this case the author must apologise for not knowing about the already existing publication.
    4. There is no excuse of any sort for plagiarising the work/ideas/research of graduate students. Moreover, this is a criminal plagiarism, since it involves denying the student’s authorship and, therefore, falsification of the student’s academic record. Furthermore, it is almost always a plagiarism of unpublished research, which makes it a fraud of a gravest kind. One of the consequences of plagiarising unpublished research is impossibility for the true author to publish his/her research. I repeat, this kind of plagiarism must go to criminal court.

    The current solutions to plagiarism by faculty are ridiculously, and probably, criminally inadequate. The college must make public the student’s complaints, the opinion of the administration and of the law firm, and publish the response of Dr. Constantine. The reign of secrecy must end. The time of secret inquisition trials, ambiguity, uninformed public debates and the dragging for many years plagiarism cases must be over.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Feb 25, 10:17 PM    #

15. Mr. Pyshnov (comment #14) is clearly not a lawyer, at least not one who practices in the U.S. Fortunately, I am.

    In order to qualify as a crime in this country an act must meet the statutory definition of a particular offense. Merely being harmful and/or reprehensible is not enough. Plagiarism is not a crime, even when done in particularly vile ways. The victims probably can bring a civil lawsuit (though doing so won’t make much sense unless Prof. Constantine can pay any damages assessed against her), but a criminal case seems implausible from the limited facts available.

    Mr. Pyshnov’s call for TC to “make public the student’s complaints, the opinion of the administration and of the law firm, and publish the response of Dr. Constantine” likewise reflects an unfamiliarity with American law. Employers are required by law to keep their employees’ personnel records private. TC thus cannot disclose these records just because it has good reason to want such disclosure. The same is true of student records. (At least one of Prof. Constantine’s accusers is a former TC professor and the other two are/were grad students.) Constantine and the others can waive this confidentiality as to their own records, but not as to each other’s. TC can’t waive it as to any of them.

    Nor can TC’s investigation be fairly called a “secret inquisition trial”. Trials are conducted by courts run by the government and are required by law to be open to the public. Internal investigations are conducted by private organizations and, in many instances (including this one), are required by law to be kept private.

    On a non-legal note, there is no distinction between “accidental” and “unintentional” plagiarism. I used the former term to mean what Mr. Pyshnov means by the latter. To the extent that my choice of words caused any confusion I apologize.

    — CU Alum    Feb 25, 11:00 PM    #

16. Dear CU Alum,

    I am curious what does “unintentional plagiarism” truly mean? The simplest definition taken from Google says that plagiarism is “stealing someone else’s ideas and presenting them as your own.” Can stealing be unintentional? Even if stealing is related to bona fide kleptomania, the demonstrable intent is there. Hence, the law will view it as an intentional, albeit severely mitigated act. Inadvertent identical phrasing of a thought by two different persons is, on the other hand, not an exception but a norm: we are, after all, quite a few billion of people, and, flexibility of languages notwithstanding, there are only so many ways to make the desired statement. However, inadvertent presentation by two independent parties of a series of identical thoughts or their assembly into identical concepts, particularly when taking place within a narrowly circumscribed group of people, is more than unlikely, and strongly indicates the possibility of willful misappropriation which then needs to be investigated if a suitable redress is to be found. The concept of “unintentional plagiarism” is an oxymoron, and its use in the present context appears as an attempt to describe pregnancy as “present but not quite.” In reality, whether plagiarism took place in the case of Professor Constantine is for a thorough investigation to demonstrate. In the meantime, I wonder how will you censure “inadvertent plagiarism”? For all I know, somebody in China might have unwittingly written exactly the same statement as I did just now. Has s/he plagiarized me or vice versa? And do we both get fired for it, pilloried, or merely denied ice cream for dessert after dinner?

    — Dag von Lubitz    Feb 25, 11:06 PM    #

17. Dag von Lubitz —

    I wouldn’t rely on Google as a substitute for a dictionary, especially when actual dictionaries are available for free online. The American Heritage Dictionary defines “plagiarize” as “1. To use and pass off (the ideas or writings of another) as one’s own; 2. To appropriate for use as one’s own passages or ideas from (another)” or “To put forth as original to oneself the ideas or words of another. “ Similarly, Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law defines plagiarize as “to copy and pass off (the expression of ideas or words of another) as one’s own : use (another’s work) without crediting the source . . .; to present as new and original an idea or work derived from an existing source”. None of these definitions includes the concept of “stealing”, which is central to your argument. By definition, stealing is intentional. Stealing, however, is not part of the definition of plagiarism.

    Unintentional plagiarism occurs when someone neglects to acknowledge the source of her material despite intending to do so. If I had mistakenly erased the names of the dictionaries I quoted earlier or mistakenly failed to insert them in the first place then I would have committed unintentional plagiarism. Such occurrences are uncommon but they do happen.

    It’s also possible for someone to recall something she heard in the past and mistakenly believe she is recalling her own prior thoughts. This is also rare, but it happens sometimes. An extended verbatim quote can’t plausibly be explained this way, but a merely similar passage or idea sometimes can.

    — CU Alum    Feb 25, 11:45 PM    #

18. The NY Post simply isn’t the issue. Readers of the Chronicle should ask themselves what professional fate would befall them if they were implicated of charges similar to those preferred against Constantine; they might be unemployed in a hot second. That Teachers College should merely request Constantine to resign, as if it were a professional courtesy, is rather extraordinary.

    — Abbott Katz    Feb 26, 06:14 AM    #

19. Peter Hoffer makes important points. Re-read his post (number 8). The next post (number 9, from Gustave) doesn’t answer fully the issues, particularly that of an appropriate venue for deciding academic matters.

    — Jesse    Feb 26, 07:53 AM    #

20. Just for the record, CU faculty and staff are not getting any more info about this than anyone else. Less perhaps. I imagine that TC people are more in the know, but the rest of us are in the dark. On another note, while I hate letting my deep cynicism show this blatantly, I find it both disheartening and disturbing that this is the prof who found a noose on her door last semester. Even more so in light of the fact that NYPD hasn’t come up with any evidence or leads related to it. A preemptive strike against getting fired?

    — CU Empolyee    Feb 26, 08:55 AM    #

21. My mentor at the University of Chicago, Harry Roberts, said it succinctly: “the defense against having one’s ideas stollen is to make so many ideas so frequently that by the time someone steals and publishes old ones, you have dozens of new ones you like better.” Leaving yourself behind in your own dust is your best defense against idea theft, in part, because idea theft is ultimately good—just a dishonest person’s way of making you famous (in the end). For, however, grad students “under” someone, it is devastating emotionally to have faculty steal from them. On the other hand, when my first dissertation proposal ended up a conference paper by some other professor—it validated my analysis ability and inspire me to a second topic a lot better and bolder than I otherwise would have dared attempt. People are their own best revenge and the plagiarist so cripples their own future thinking ability that their own evolving stupidity shines before all as proof of their past crimes.

    — Richard Tabor Greene    Feb 26, 08:55 AM    #

22. Poster 20 echoes my suspicions – but suspicions they must remain, of course, absent proof. It would make for a good made-for-tv movie, though, and I wouldn’t be surprised if some screenwriter is already preparing a treatment along those plot lines.

    — Abbott Katz    Feb 26, 09:05 AM    #

23. “Newpapers” owned by Rupert Murdoch are like a bipolar chimpanzee at a typewriter. By random chance they might spell out a word, more likely not, in any case there would be mania. Knowing nothing about this case, were I to read the Post editorial, I would still know nothing.

    — Stuart Dryer    Feb 26, 09:16 AM    #

24. Both the professor and TC have serious credibility problems. What’s needed here is the disinfectant of sunshine. TC owes its students, faculty, alumni and other stakeholders a full and complete explanation of why a senior professor who committed plagiarism is still on the faculty.

    — Innocent By-Stander    Feb 26, 09:26 AM    #

25. If she said, “I am not a crook” without indicating she was quoting RMN, and the NYP published it, is it plagiarism, a crime or a shame? And what should the administration of TC do about it beyond hanging a noose on her office door?

    — Richard Millhouse PhD (yes, that _is_ my real name, not a chance for you to make a joke, my mom was a loyal republican)    Feb 26, 09:46 AM    #

26. What concerns me the most is that the Black woman that accused Dr. Constantine of stealing her work has not published anything substantial. I mean if you are that bright really what are you doing now and like WHO ARE YOU? The woman has added nothing to the field. It’s causes me to reflect about her motives and intent. Could she have possibly envied Dr. Constantine? It’s all too fishy to me.

    — Debra C.    Feb 26, 10:09 AM    #

27. Plagiarism is not illegal, but it is one of three actions (with fabrication and falsification) that meet the U.S. federal standards for sanctionable misconduct under the federal common definition of misconduct.

    — Professor    Feb 26, 10:21 AM    #

28. CU Alum (comment 15) is apparently a lawyer, but is it fortunate for those who sometimes are defrauded in scientific community?
    1. To make a general statement that plagiarism is not a crime is wrong. Some types of plagiarism, of which I spoke, that constitute fraud could be a crime as fraud could be a criminal offence. Novel instances of fraud are not barred, as the courts wisely never gave a definition of fraud.
    2. Another way plagiarism could be a crime is when it constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty toward a student-researcher (US court had recognised the existence of fiduciary obligations in such circumstances).
    3. Strictly speaking, plagiarism is not a theft: the courts argued that a true author can never be deprived of authorship by a plagiarist, merely because authorship is not a property, but it is a FACT ACCOMPLISHED. The fact cannot be stolen, but it can be falsified.
    4. What is plagiarism? I argued for years that definition of plagiarism should be “A falsification of the fact of authorship”. This definition seems to me the only way to describe the act without the conflicting with the law reference to stealing. On the other side, it points to the real meaning of the act of plagiarism.
    5. CU Alum refers to the law requiring to keep “their employees’ personnel records” (personal?) private. That law must be amended to allow the full disclosure of documents in cases when an employee has obligations not only to the employer, but also (and much more importantly) to the public who are the client of the university and the beneficiary of fiduciary relationships. Fiduciary is accountable to the beneficiary and, in fact, the burden of proof can be transferred on him to prove his innocence.

    Being a fiduciary and in full knowledge of the research of his student-researcher, and having betrayed this trust, and having used this information to the detriment of his beneficiary and for self-interest and falsifying the fact of authorship of the research done by his student (and vital to the student’s future, career, employment and name) – do you need more to go to jail for a good many years? A prof who builds his FALSE academic credentials by falsely denying the authorship of the true author – that sure will sent him to jail; well, if not for the corrupt to the bone academic establishment and their lawyers.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Feb 26, 10:27 AM    #

29. Dear CU Alum,
    Ours is a debate outside the context of the present one, but, if we continue elsewhere, we may reach a better clarification of the misconceptions affecting the issue. Presently, suffice to say that I used the “simplest” definition. All others, including ones that you quote, imply the awareness of the act of wrongful misappropriation being committed. The word “inadvertent” does not constitute a part of that definition, nor is it used as a modifier thereof. Thus, like with pregnancy, it is either there or it is not. There is no “inadvertent plagiarism.” There may be an “inadvertent omission” which is easily corrected if the error is noted and the ethical foundations of the perpetrator are sound. Truly genuine (and demonstrable) lack of awareness of the existence of similar prior work by others does not constitute plagiarism. It happens often, and we are (typically) not much offended by it. On the other hand, please note that, the etymological root of the concept, plagiarius, denotes a kidnapper, or a thief. The American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy (2rd Edition) defines the concept equally bluntly: “literary theft.” Neither kidnapping nor theft can be performed in the state of blissful unawareness. “Stealing” is then a synonym that fully applies. Even if there are no criminal connotations, the ethical ones are of equal gravity, and it is in the latter arena that the academic community needs to be particularly vigilant.
    Good point, Mr. Pyshnov; adopting your definition is an elegant way of solving the dilemma. To the rest of you, apologies for the set of mighty digressions nonetheless, although it does occasionally help to clarify the terms.

    — Dag von Lubitz    Feb 26, 10:49 AM    #

30. Wow! Is it conceivable that human beings will someday recognize that some things are wrong and deal with them without the extensive commentary?

    If the woman is guilty of stealing someone else’s work get rid of her. We do after all, expect students to follow the rules.

    In the grand scheme of life, and dealt with appropriately, this is not a big deal. However, what has made it a big deal is the fumbling approach to dealing with the problems.

    I suspect, though I can’t prove, this woman has been a thorn in the side of every academic she has dealt with from the opening of her undergraduate days and that’s why we are enduring this “much ado about nothing.” (Shakespeare, England, c1600)

    — R2    Feb 26, 12:18 PM    #

31. Just a quick response to point #1 from comment 28:

    It is not true that there is no definition of fraud. In fact there is a very precise definition. What Prof. Constantine is accused of doing doesn’t qualify. Her actions were dishonest, but not all dishonest acts amount to fraud.

    The idea that a person could be convicted of a crime that has not been defined beforehand is antithetical to the notion of Due Process, which is a fundamental part of our system of justice. The rules under which one can be convicted must pre-date the act and cannot be improvised later by a court that feels (however justifiably) that a given act should be a crime.

    — CU Alum    Feb 26, 01:22 PM    #

32. It’s curious that Universities only apply honor systems to their students, the least mature and least prepared participants in the higher education system. When I’ve proposed applying the same standards to professors and administrators, they just give me a funny look. “One strike for students, many strikes for us, because we are adults….with tenure.”

    — smcdonald    Feb 26, 01:56 PM    #

33. Hmmmmm

    How does a black woman fromm non-top tier programs get a tenured job at Columbia?

    Remember the Jason Blair incident? Another under-qualified black person who was awarded a prized position because of his race.

    How has this woman not been fired yet?

    I love the double-standards.

    — Roberta    Feb 26, 02:07 PM    #

34. I met Dr. Constantine once and I really liked her. Don’t really think she is capable of this. Sorry folks.

    — Amanda    Feb 26, 02:51 PM    #

35. to #33…

    The answer to your question is an all-too-common one…

    The good “Dr” got her job the way her ilk always does. She sashays into her interview with the blondest dreadlocks this side of a Las Vegas stripper’s dance pole and begins to unwrap MILES of Kinte clothe draped around her ample “majesty” before the predictably quivering audience of a white search committee cowards as she let’s out with racist diatribes and obtuse references to..“as a black woman, as a victim, as a marginalized person…blah, blah, blah”.

    Then the august (and cowardly) “search” committee, under pressure (usually imagined) by upper administration offers the job to her highness.

    Now they get her, and her arrogance and her ignorance and her lack of integrity.

    Typically, they will cover up for her and even carry her load, while she’s suffering her imagined oppressioin driving to Martha’s Vineyard in her BMW for yet another vacation.

    Seen it all before and for this reason, I do not attend my department’s open fora for their “diversity” candidates, so that I don’t have vomit all the way home.

    Her appointment to a top tier school with (at best) VERY suspect credentials underscores YET again, the sad, sad state of pollitically-corrected and compromised intellectual integrity to be found (in abundance) on campuses all over this country.

    Be thankful her role on the Columbia campus was not in the realm of life-threatening medical research.

    We would all be dead of the very disease she was responsible for “researching”.

    What a slap for Columbia and what an exposure to internal skidmarks.

    Shame on you.

    And let’s not forget our condolescences to all the others that applied for her position and were sent template letters acknowledging their lack of “fit” for the position.

    Columbia is no more guilty of this reprehensible behavior than MANY other schools in this country. Truly a sad state in America.

    — gm    Feb 26, 03:45 PM    #

36. Q. anyone have the names of the Columbia Search Committee who hired her?

    They should at the very least receive public acknowledgment for their “work”.

    — grace    Feb 26, 03:53 PM    #

37. Amanda states that she has met Dr C. “once” and that she “really liked her” and that she doesn’t think “she is capable of this.” I’d like to point out that those who know her best—the ones with whom she works—do think she is capable of this, regardless of how likable she is to relative strangers. I would also like to point out that people who try to get away with this sort of thing often rely on creating the impression that they could never do this sort of thing. But, of course they could. Someone’s getting the wool pulled over their eyes. Could it be everyone else?

    — Tracy G.    Feb 26, 04:56 PM    #

38. GM has a serious victim complex and should seek counseling. That and take a remedial writing module.

    However, I do agree that Constantine should be fired. We cannot have different standards between professors and students when it comes to academic integrity. Furthermore, playing the race card is a way of “crying wolf” and only serves to complicate what’s really in question, which is academic integrity.

    Forensics experts should take epithelials on the noose to see if her own are on there. Just sayin.

    — Nixon    Feb 26, 05:13 PM    #

39. Why has the article been removed from the front-page of the Chronicle?

    Maybe the Chronicle gets uncomfortable when people talk about race and underqualified people.

    Liberal conspiracy? Hmmmmmm

    — Roberta    Feb 26, 06:12 PM    #

40. After reading the 39 posts I am incredibly sad and feel in need of a shower. I share your concerns about the integrity of scholarship and the treatment of graduate students and faculty plagarism. However, some of your comments are intolerant and yes, racist. I have known Dr. Constatine for a number of years and am saddened about her actions. But no one deserves some of these comments.

    — Margaret    Feb 26, 06:50 PM    #

41. CU Alum says:
    “It is not true that there is no definition of fraud. In fact there is a very precise definition.”
    OK, I WANT TO SEE IT HERE, THE “VERY PRECISE DEFINITION”!

    I repeat: the courts have consistently refused to give definition of fraud, always saying that human “ingenuity” can invent new frauds which would not fit the definition adopted earlier.

    Therefore, talking about charging someone with crime that did not exist on the books (in case where the crime is fraud), is very strange for a lawyer.

    I believe that basic things about the law of plagiarism must finally be introduced to the academia. They of course exist, but the lawyers serving academia always mislead the public. Example: some years ago the question was raised: “Who owns the data?” Just two weeks ago a student asked me: “Does the work of a student belong to the student?” Today, we see the “unintentional” plagiarism. Some unthinking mind invented “self-plagiarism”. Sorry to say this, but I saw over the years many various attempts to mislead the public. And the public is not even capable of arguing obvious things with the people who call themselves lawyers.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Feb 26, 08:03 PM    #

42. Michael Pyshnov —

    Fraud is a state-law crime and its precise definition may vary slightly from one state to the next. This is California’s definition, which is quite typical:

    “The elements of actual fraud . . . are (1) misrepresentation (false representation, concealment, or nondisclosure); (2) knowledge of falsity (or ‘scienter’); (3) intent to defraud, that is, to induce reliance; (4) justifiable reliance; and (5) resulting damage.” (Cal. Jur. 3d Fraud and Deceit § 9.)

    You have made many statements about what various unidentified courts have supposedly said. My sense is that you are wrong; at a minimum, you are taking their rulings out of context. Being vaguely familiar with a handful of rulings does not make you an expert on the law and can lead to serious misunderstandings.

    — CU Alum    Feb 26, 08:36 PM    #

43. CU Alum,
    What you have quoted are the elements that are required to be proved in court to prove fraud. Yes, these requirements vary.
    But, you should know that this is not a definition of fraud by any means.

    — Michael Pyshnov    Feb 26, 10:29 PM    #

44. Nixon, save yhour cheap psycho-analysis cause you don’t like another’s post.

    Imagine race games in the American academy and the embarrassing consequences exposed…already obvious, common and oh so boooooooooring!

    gm was right by implication…don’t hire these abundantly obvious frauds in the first place and then you don’t have to fire them under the microscope of peer review and scrutiny: usually highly negative and detrimental. Now get back to your search committee.

    — G.    Feb 26, 11:01 PM    #

45. I know this woman personally. She is guilty of plagiarism and more than likely, she hung the noose there herself because she knew that this story was about to break. Just because you have seen her in passing or sat in her classes for a couple of semesters does not mean that you know the real her. Please don’t be misled…

    — Anon    Feb 27, 09:16 AM    #

46. Does anyone here knows the rules of behaviour in decent society? How can, one after another, anonymous letters degrading the person be sent here? I would have no objections if they were signed. When you want to accuse another person, sometimes it’s right to do, but you must sign YOUR name. I always advocated prohibition on any anonymous posting, but when it’s like #45, I think this must be a lie – just because it’s not signed.
    The moderators censor mercilessly my signed letters when the letter contains names of the professors whom I accuse (with reference to documents!) of perpetrating fraud; they protect the names and/or they protect the Chronicle (this is never made clear). But, is the same OK with anonymous accusations? Or is it the difference in the names? Some are protected and some are not?

    — Michael Pyshnov    Feb 27, 01:27 PM    #

47. Some of the posts on this discussion are ugly, mean-spirited, and yes racist. I expect more from Chronicle readers regardless of how everyone feels about this situation.

    — UW Alum    Feb 27, 03:29 PM    #

48. I am not surprised by the racism. To assume that because an individual is “educated” they should conduct themselves as such is a deep fault of American society. People hate others. If I were to mention the years of reverse discrimination that benefited whites in housing, jobs, and education and prevented other races from any equal opportunities, there are many who would read it and think:

    1. So what, that was a long time ago, everyone is equal now.
    2. It should still be that way.
    3. Blacks, Hispanics, Gays, etc have a personal agenda, are unAmerican, and don’t deserve any help. They are lazy and good-for-nothing.

    It’s the way our great country works. Unfortunately, I don’t think it will ever really change.

    — Marjorie Dorime    Feb 27, 05:14 PM    #

49. A couple of comments:

    a) If the author has no knowledge of previous work (Pyshnov 2008), why should they be required to apologize? NO ONE can know all work (nor should they be expected to, especially if it is an obscure reference) and that is NOT grounds for an apology. Such cases, when determined, should result in NO sanction.

    b) Although this is not the case this time, in co-authored papers a legitimate defense is “My co-author claimed to have written that material.” This does not excuse the plagiarism and should result is SOME punishment, it is a mitigating circumstance (provided the author had no reason to suspect his/her co-author in the past). For example, sometimes on deadline, one author will make changes to a manuscript without knowledge of the others. In other cases, co-authors are brought in knowing only part of the whole problem and are asked to solve that small problem. Finally, just as I doubt any of us would bust a student for failure to cite one line in a 30 page paper (a reprimand would be appropriate in such a case), the degree of severity should play a role.

    Finally, for those calling for the professor’s head, remember that the university REQUESTED her to resign. If they had enough evidence, they should have fired her. Obviously, they did not and the Post should be reprimanded for getting in the way of her right to a fair inquiry.

    References:

    Pyshnov, Michael. 2008. Comment on ‘New York Post’ Deems Columbia U.‘s handling of Plagiarism Case ‘Contemptible’, http://chronicle.com/news/article/4034/new-york-post-deems-columbia-us-handling-of-plagiarism-case-contemptible accessed on February 29, 2008

    — Carolyn Wu    Feb 29, 06:53 AM    #

50. while fair inquiry takes its course, students might consider firing a warning shot across the bow (of the alleged plaigiarist or anyone else for that matter)… perhaps a copyright note at the bottom of the title page of any written work: name, date and the usual “uses other than reading and grading for class purposes, including electonic storage/ retreival, etc., reprinting, copying, quotation or any other from of distribution without the written consent of the author and/or his/her assigns is prohibited and subject to prosecution under international copyright law”…and so on.

    — h.c.ecco    Feb 29, 05:19 PM    #

Previous: Thousands Could Lose Out on Larger Pell Grants, Analysis Suggests
Next: Academic and International Groups Urge Bush to Ease Restrictions on Travel to Cuba