Today, I sent a letter to Dr. Pam Benoit, Ohio University's Executive Vice President and Provost, asking her to reconsider the decision (by her predecessor, Dr. Kathy Krendl) to appoint Dr. Ingram as chairman of the Academic Honesty Hearing Committee. I think Dr. Ingram should be removed from the hearing committee because, as the record shows, he really does not care about academic quality or honesty. I proved this by including four enclosures showing student cheating that took place under Dr. Ingram's watch.
Enclosure #1 shows plagiarism by Dr. Ingram's doctoral student. I highlighted the plagiarism so that it is easy to see the degree to which this student cheated. The extensive copying makes it clear to me that the approving committee did not care that the student submitted the work of others. There are a few giveaways that any competent professor should have noted. For example, on page 21, the student uses British spelling of the words "vaporisation" and "fibres." But on page 26 he uses the word "fiber." The student is from Pakistan, but evidently not one professor on the committee asked why he uses both British and American spellings of the same word. I also think the many misspellings should have raised flags about this student. For example, see the bottom of page 71 where Dr. Kayani wrote the words "illuminate" and "repeal" instead of "eliminate" and "repel." Dr. Kayani did not even bother to copy correctly. Clearly, quality and originality is not a concern of Dr. Ingram's.
Enclosure #2 shows plagiarism by one of Dr. Alam's students who was co-advised by Dr. Ingram. Again, Dr. Ingram should have easily recognized that the student submitted text that is way beyond the capability of an Ohio University graduate student. There is no way that Dr. Ingram could have thought the student wrote what he submitted.
Enclosure #3 shows plagiarism in a rewritten thesis approved by the Dr. Ingram and the Academic Honesty Hearing Committee. Republication of this thesis clearly shows disregard for the rewrite policy touted by Ohio University. Aside from republishing plagiarism, the fact that the student did not even spell his own name correctly raises serious concerns. I question whether or not the student was even involved in the rewrite.
Enclosure #4 shows another shoddy rewrite approved by Dr. Ingram and the Academic Honesty Hearing Committee. Note that the student deleted two entire chapters from his thesis without even bothering to re-paginate.
When Ohio University's Board of Trustees created the Academic Honesty Hearing Committee, I seriously doubt that they thought the provost would appoint a chairman who has direct involvement in the origin of the very cases he is hearing. Dr. Ingram's appointment makes a mockery of everything the university does to deal with their plagiarism problem. We can only hope that the new provost will act appropriately.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Mechanical Engineering Unsure of Degree Requirements
Every once in a while I read the Mechanical Engineering faculty meeting notes available on the chairman's webpage, and I was absolutely appalled at what I read in last week's minutes. One of the "Open Items" discussed during the January 6, 2010 meeting is:
"Develop department-level understanding of an appropriate scope and level of difficulty for a graduate project (vs. a thesis)."
So Ohio University Mechanical Engineering has been awarding graduate degrees for well over 20 years and they are just now trying to reach an understanding of the requirements. This is unbelievable. How can anyone trust the qualifications of Mechanical Engineering graduates when the faculty have not yet reached an "understanding of an appropriate scope and level of difficulty?"
Considering the number of bogus theses and dissertations that have been approved by these professors, I can only imagine what we would find if we could read some the project reports they have approved.
I would think that an accredited university would work out the basic details like what the academic requirements are before they start conferring degrees. I think President McDavis needs to suspend Mechanical Engineering's power to award degrees until they decide on what the requirements should be.
"Develop department-level understanding of an appropriate scope and level of difficulty for a graduate project (vs. a thesis)."
So Ohio University Mechanical Engineering has been awarding graduate degrees for well over 20 years and they are just now trying to reach an understanding of the requirements. This is unbelievable. How can anyone trust the qualifications of Mechanical Engineering graduates when the faculty have not yet reached an "understanding of an appropriate scope and level of difficulty?"
Considering the number of bogus theses and dissertations that have been approved by these professors, I can only imagine what we would find if we could read some the project reports they have approved.
I would think that an accredited university would work out the basic details like what the academic requirements are before they start conferring degrees. I think President McDavis needs to suspend Mechanical Engineering's power to award degrees until they decide on what the requirements should be.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Plagiarism Committees Do Not Read Theses
An astute reader left a comment to my previous post and I would now like to address the comment here.
Referring to Ohio University's sole use of TurnItIn.com to check past theses for plagiarism, the commenter wrote, "is that all they really use? For such a serious offense, one would hope for a more thorough approach in detecting plagiarism."
I had the same question, and about a year ago (after a few tries), I got an answer. Yes, TurnItIn.com is all they use. To show you, I scanned an email I received from Ohio University legal affairs back in 2008.
Furthermore, as I pointed out in another post, TurnItIn.com was the only tool Dr. Koonce used in his FINAL REPORT: An Investigation into Plagiarism in Theses of the Russ College of
Engineering and Technology 1980-2006. On page 11 of Dr. Koonce's report, he discusses the methods he used to detect plagiarism. He wrote: "Detecting external plagiarism was accomplished by comparing documents against the Turnitin database." There is no mention whatsoever in the report that theses will be read. On page 5 of his report, he wrote: "It will be assumed that any document which contains external plagiarism will have that duplicated text detected by the evaluation software employed in the study (The Turnitin R plagiarism detection tool)."
Obviously, Dr. Koonce made a very poor assumption. In fact, one year after Dr. Koonce concluded his investigation, Dr. Prudich identified 4 additional theses that were missed by Dr. Koonce's investigation. Nevertheless, Ohio University continues to stand behind Dr. Koonce's faulty report from which he conveniently concluded, "I see no need to investigate further."
This was a ploy on Ohio University's part to deceive the public. They really did not want to find plagiarism. That attitude goes back to the beginning of their investigations as evidenced by a statement by Jerrel Mitchell, the leader of the Academic Honesty Oversight Committee. As reported in The Post back in 2006, Jerrel Mitchell told the other members of the committee investigating plagiarism, "It is not our charge to go looking for plagiarism cases. The charging person must be very specific, i.e., he/she must tell us who is charged and specifically where to find the plagiarism." In other words, this group of professors only looked at what I gave them, and they ignored plagiarism that I did not outline for them. This is the very reason that a rewrite that contains plagiarism was republished; the student only deleted plagiarism I had identified in 2005, but he republished plagiarism that I did not know about until later. (Note: the republished plagiarism was also missed by a TurnItIn.com evaluation).
I agree completely with the reader's comment. I too would hope that Ohio University would make an honest effort to clear their library of plagiarism. Unfortunately, Ohio University professors have an aversion to reading.
Referring to Ohio University's sole use of TurnItIn.com to check past theses for plagiarism, the commenter wrote, "is that all they really use? For such a serious offense, one would hope for a more thorough approach in detecting plagiarism."
I had the same question, and about a year ago (after a few tries), I got an answer. Yes, TurnItIn.com is all they use. To show you, I scanned an email I received from Ohio University legal affairs back in 2008.
Furthermore, as I pointed out in another post, TurnItIn.com was the only tool Dr. Koonce used in his FINAL REPORT: An Investigation into Plagiarism in Theses of the Russ College of
Engineering and Technology 1980-2006. On page 11 of Dr. Koonce's report, he discusses the methods he used to detect plagiarism. He wrote: "Detecting external plagiarism was accomplished by comparing documents against the Turnitin database." There is no mention whatsoever in the report that theses will be read. On page 5 of his report, he wrote: "It will be assumed that any document which contains external plagiarism will have that duplicated text detected by the evaluation software employed in the study (The Turnitin R plagiarism detection tool)."
Obviously, Dr. Koonce made a very poor assumption. In fact, one year after Dr. Koonce concluded his investigation, Dr. Prudich identified 4 additional theses that were missed by Dr. Koonce's investigation. Nevertheless, Ohio University continues to stand behind Dr. Koonce's faulty report from which he conveniently concluded, "I see no need to investigate further."
This was a ploy on Ohio University's part to deceive the public. They really did not want to find plagiarism. That attitude goes back to the beginning of their investigations as evidenced by a statement by Jerrel Mitchell, the leader of the Academic Honesty Oversight Committee. As reported in The Post back in 2006, Jerrel Mitchell told the other members of the committee investigating plagiarism, "It is not our charge to go looking for plagiarism cases. The charging person must be very specific, i.e., he/she must tell us who is charged and specifically where to find the plagiarism." In other words, this group of professors only looked at what I gave them, and they ignored plagiarism that I did not outline for them. This is the very reason that a rewrite that contains plagiarism was republished; the student only deleted plagiarism I had identified in 2005, but he republished plagiarism that I did not know about until later. (Note: the republished plagiarism was also missed by a TurnItIn.com evaluation).
I agree completely with the reader's comment. I too would hope that Ohio University would make an honest effort to clear their library of plagiarism. Unfortunately, Ohio University professors have an aversion to reading.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
TurnItIn.com Fails Again
From what I have seen TurnItIn.com is useless when it comes to detecting plagiarism in engineering theses and dissertations.
Today, I want to show you another case of plagiarism that was missed by TurnItIn.com when Ohio University checked all of the theses and dissertations approved by Drs. Gunasekera and Mehta.
In November 2002, five Ohio University professors collectively approved the doctoral dissertation submitted by Padmasiri Vipul Ranatunga. Later in 2006, after Ohio University finally acknowledged a severe plagiarism problem, they used TurnItIn.com to recheck Dr. Ranatunga's dissertation. After the second check, the dissertation was cleared and recataloged in the university library. However, when I checked the dissertation, I found page after page of verbatim plagiarism. I have highlighted the plagiarism here. As you can see, Dr. Ranatunga copied copiously from at least three different sources. Two of the sources can be seen here and here. The third source is a book that I did not take the time to go scan and post.
Notice that Dr. Ranatunga acknowledges five professors for serving on his dissertation committee. The approving professors are: Dr. Gunasekera, Dr. Pasic, Dr. Mehta, Dr. Sormaz, and Dr. Gulino. Except for Dr. Sormaz, I have seen the other four professors' names numerous times as committee members for cheating students. There is no doubt in my mind that the professors did not care that the doctoral student submitted copied material.
It is worth noting that Dr. Ranatunga also plagiarized in his 1999 master's thesis (also approved by Dr. Gunasekera). When interviewed by Paula Wasley in 2006, Dr. Ranatunga stated that he intended to challenge those plagiarism allegations. Evidently, he changed his mind as his thesis re-write has been re-cataloged in the Ohio University library. He is probably now working on re-writing his doctoral dissertation.
I find it remarkable that Dr. Ranatunga told Pauly Wasley that the copying in his thesis "is not plagiarism," and when interviewed by Robert Tomsho of The Wall Street Journal, he said "we had no idea of what to put on a thesis when we took material from someone else’s work." These comments certainly explain things: Ohio University has been awarding advanced graduate degrees to individuals who have no idea what it means to write and publish a thesis or dissertation. What's even worse is that (like other Ohio University graduates) Dr. Ranatunga is now a tenured professor himself. How nice it is for Ohio University to confer a doctoral degree in 2002 and then allow the student to actually do the work seven years later. What a joke.
Today, I want to show you another case of plagiarism that was missed by TurnItIn.com when Ohio University checked all of the theses and dissertations approved by Drs. Gunasekera and Mehta.
In November 2002, five Ohio University professors collectively approved the doctoral dissertation submitted by Padmasiri Vipul Ranatunga. Later in 2006, after Ohio University finally acknowledged a severe plagiarism problem, they used TurnItIn.com to recheck Dr. Ranatunga's dissertation. After the second check, the dissertation was cleared and recataloged in the university library. However, when I checked the dissertation, I found page after page of verbatim plagiarism. I have highlighted the plagiarism here. As you can see, Dr. Ranatunga copied copiously from at least three different sources. Two of the sources can be seen here and here. The third source is a book that I did not take the time to go scan and post.
Notice that Dr. Ranatunga acknowledges five professors for serving on his dissertation committee. The approving professors are: Dr. Gunasekera, Dr. Pasic, Dr. Mehta, Dr. Sormaz, and Dr. Gulino. Except for Dr. Sormaz, I have seen the other four professors' names numerous times as committee members for cheating students. There is no doubt in my mind that the professors did not care that the doctoral student submitted copied material.
It is worth noting that Dr. Ranatunga also plagiarized in his 1999 master's thesis (also approved by Dr. Gunasekera). When interviewed by Paula Wasley in 2006, Dr. Ranatunga stated that he intended to challenge those plagiarism allegations. Evidently, he changed his mind as his thesis re-write has been re-cataloged in the Ohio University library. He is probably now working on re-writing his doctoral dissertation.
I find it remarkable that Dr. Ranatunga told Pauly Wasley that the copying in his thesis "is not plagiarism," and when interviewed by Robert Tomsho of The Wall Street Journal, he said "we had no idea of what to put on a thesis when we took material from someone else’s work." These comments certainly explain things: Ohio University has been awarding advanced graduate degrees to individuals who have no idea what it means to write and publish a thesis or dissertation. What's even worse is that (like other Ohio University graduates) Dr. Ranatunga is now a tenured professor himself. How nice it is for Ohio University to confer a doctoral degree in 2002 and then allow the student to actually do the work seven years later. What a joke.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Education Doctoral Graduate Continues to Plagiarize
In a previous post, I showed that a 2007 doctoral graduate of Ohio University's College of Education plagiarized in his doctoral dissertation. Now I want to show you that this graduate has continued to cheat after leaving Ohio University.
In 2007 Ohio University graduate, Dr. Mansour Aldojan, published a paper titled "Regardless of how innovative the faculty may be: Addressing Faculty Concerns and Differences about Adoption of New Technologies" in the Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007.
The paper contains extensive plagiarism some of which I have highlighted here. Three of the sources he copied can be viewed here, here, and here. There is additional copying in the paper, but I did not take the time to mark every last bit.
Dr. Aldojan obtained a doctoral degree from Ohio University and he does not even know how to write a paper. Will Ohio University revoke his degree? Will his advisor be held accountable? Will his current employer be advised of his lack of qualifications? Will The World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications be notified that they published a paper containing extensive plagiarism? How many more Ohio University Education graduates do not know how to write?
In 2007 Ohio University graduate, Dr. Mansour Aldojan, published a paper titled "Regardless of how innovative the faculty may be: Addressing Faculty Concerns and Differences about Adoption of New Technologies" in the Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007.
The paper contains extensive plagiarism some of which I have highlighted here. Three of the sources he copied can be viewed here, here, and here. There is additional copying in the paper, but I did not take the time to mark every last bit.
Dr. Aldojan obtained a doctoral degree from Ohio University and he does not even know how to write a paper. Will Ohio University revoke his degree? Will his advisor be held accountable? Will his current employer be advised of his lack of qualifications? Will The World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications be notified that they published a paper containing extensive plagiarism? How many more Ohio University Education graduates do not know how to write?
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
Distinguished Professor and Student Plagiarize Together
In 2004, Dr. Maliski, Dr. Kalinowski, and Dr. Dobrucki published an article in Circulation magazine. But rather than writing all of their publication they copied from a 2001 article published in Free Radical Biology and Medicine.
To show you I have highlighted the plagiarized text here. The source of the copied text can be viewed here. In comparing the two publications, it is interesting to note that the true authors acted professionally when they properly cited their sources, but when the Malinski et. al. team copied the text they removed all the citations.
It will be interesting to see if Ohio University leaders take any action against Dr. Malinski and Dr. Dobrucki. Will they revoke Dr. Dobrucki's doctoral degree? Will they strip Dr. Malinski of his distinguished professor title? Will they contact Circulation Magazine to inform them that they published copied text? Will an expert be called in to verify the legitimacy of the entire article? Will they check all of the work approved by Dr. Malinski? Will anyone apologize to the scholars whose work was stolen?
To show you I have highlighted the plagiarized text here. The source of the copied text can be viewed here. In comparing the two publications, it is interesting to note that the true authors acted professionally when they properly cited their sources, but when the Malinski et. al. team copied the text they removed all the citations.
It will be interesting to see if Ohio University leaders take any action against Dr. Malinski and Dr. Dobrucki. Will they revoke Dr. Dobrucki's doctoral degree? Will they strip Dr. Malinski of his distinguished professor title? Will they contact Circulation Magazine to inform them that they published copied text? Will an expert be called in to verify the legitimacy of the entire article? Will they check all of the work approved by Dr. Malinski? Will anyone apologize to the scholars whose work was stolen?
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Another Distinguished Professor Approves Plagiarism
In November 2004, about 5 months after Dr. Alam began to unfairly stonewall me on my master's thesis, Distinguished Professor Dr. Tadeusz Malinski approved a chemistry doctoral dissertation that contains pages of blatant plagiarism. To show you, I have highlighted pages of plagiarized text from the dissertation. The text highlighted in blue is copied from this source, and the text highlighted in green is copied from this source.
There are some very important questions that arise from this dissertation.
How will Ohio University's College of Arts and Sciences deal with this cheating student? The student clearly shows an intent to deceive the reader by making the subtle change of switching the word "we" to "I" (see page 22) or failing to include the copied sources in her reference list. It is also important to recognize that the student avoided performing literary research on her subject by copying many of her citations from others. In other words, the multitude of citations and associated references make it appear like she went to the library and read numerous papers on her subject when in reality, she was able to build a lengthy reference list without ever obtaining, reading or analyzing those references. This person clearly does not deserve the title: Doctor of Philosophy.
How will Ohio University deal with the professor who awarded a doctoral degree to a student who cheated to meet her degree requirements? I seriously doubt that Dr. Malinski and the other professors on the doctoral committee believed that their student wrote with such expertise. I believe that either they did not read the dissertation or they did not care that she copied. Either way, the approving professors are in violation of the Ohio University Faculty Handbook Statement on Professional Ethics.
Will President McDavis, and the other distinguished professors strip Dr. Malinski of his distinguished professor title like they did to Dr. Gunasekera?
There are some very important questions that arise from this dissertation.
How will Ohio University's College of Arts and Sciences deal with this cheating student? The student clearly shows an intent to deceive the reader by making the subtle change of switching the word "we" to "I" (see page 22) or failing to include the copied sources in her reference list. It is also important to recognize that the student avoided performing literary research on her subject by copying many of her citations from others. In other words, the multitude of citations and associated references make it appear like she went to the library and read numerous papers on her subject when in reality, she was able to build a lengthy reference list without ever obtaining, reading or analyzing those references. This person clearly does not deserve the title: Doctor of Philosophy.
How will Ohio University deal with the professor who awarded a doctoral degree to a student who cheated to meet her degree requirements? I seriously doubt that Dr. Malinski and the other professors on the doctoral committee believed that their student wrote with such expertise. I believe that either they did not read the dissertation or they did not care that she copied. Either way, the approving professors are in violation of the Ohio University Faculty Handbook Statement on Professional Ethics.
Will President McDavis, and the other distinguished professors strip Dr. Malinski of his distinguished professor title like they did to Dr. Gunasekera?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)