Plagiarism in The Evil Within - Trevor Marriott (moved discussion)

[Mike Covell]

(where's the goat!).

You called?

[lynn cates]

On the other hand--five fingers.

Hello Mike. Thanks.

"There's just not an 'on the other hand'."

Are you seriously suggesting that an instructor should violate norms and FERPA rules by publicly browbeating students who improperly footnote?

Cheers.
LC

[Ally]

Just out of curiosity Phil (and going off-topic), what would your opinion be on a private board, visible and accessible only to serious researchers where ideas could be shared out of the public view, debated and expanded upon until all parties were satisfied and then those threads locked and published?

It seems to me that there are two problems inherent in the boards, censorship vs being bogged down in stupidity. I don't think anyone has found the magic bullet.

How do you raise the level of debate without employing censorship of free thought? I mean yes, the Van Gogh tripe is patent idiocy, but where does the line get drawn. I mean I find all the black magic stuff idiocy (where's the goat!) but should that be censored because I find it rubbish? Hard line to draw I think.

[Phil H]

I think there is a lot of inconsistency and many different levels of understanding both on these boards and in the world.

I (and others better qualified than I) have had long wrangles with Trevor (among others) about the use of historical evidence. This is no difficult thing to understand. In britain in the 60s it was taught in schools as part of the learning process. yet we find plenty of examples where people want to just forget evidence that doesn't suit them, or dismiss/disparage inconvenient material such as the marginalia or the Dutfield's Yard photo when they appear and even now.

When I argue for higher standards, of the need to raise the bar of "Ripperology" I find myself abused and rubbished. But do the threads on van Gogh or Sickert (et al) really add anything to our subject? Yet they are excused as fun by people who cannot see (germane to this thread) that they abuse evidence, logic and any kind of standards. Sure, let's have fun, but if we do not make it very clear that such threads are not good in quality, the infection will spread.

I am told these days that you can download essays from the internet for school, or college work. I am sure many students cut and past from Wikipedia to do their homework or projacts - so where is the understanding of plagiarism or personal thought?

In Ripper studies I think one of the reasons that poor standards have been seen as acceptable by some, stems from the 50s (even the 20s as Leonard Matters was a journalist as well as an MP) when JTR was a matter for journalists and people made up quotes and confused sources. Things have improved since then - for a while, with people like Rumbelow, Begg, Evans, Whittington-Egan, Fido, Sinner, Sugden and others, it looked like we had turned a corner. Now this....

The Ripper world, as I have observed before, remains competitive and commercial. People see books as money-spinners. I have contrasted that in the past with the Richard III field where the RIII Society has funded pure academic research, published key sources and raised plaques and monuments. They are taken seriously. They come together - not fly apart as we seem to do.

I really don't think Trevor understands what he has done. I think, like some sort of psychological alchemist he transmutes all views into "I am in the right".
But I think his publishers, or future ones, may take heed. we shall see. I don't expect to see his secret Files book out anytime soon.

Phil

[Ally]

Yes but students don't receive monetary advances for the work they are putting out to be their own. They aren't professionals, they are students and you have authority over them. Therefore, there are conduct rules in how to handle student plagiarism that are completely different than professional plagiarism. If a professor were caught plagiarizing his works, you can bet that would not be handled, IN PRIVATE. Oh his University might try to keep it hushed up (Blake Publishing) but no one else in the world has an obligation to do so. Indeed, I would say that the obligation is exactly the opposite - to make it clear to all concerned what was done so that no other person might fall victim to this practice. And no other university would hire a professor with such shoddy practices. And from what I gather by Mark's article, Trevor was approached, IN PRIVATE, and shrugged it off.

[mklhawley]

Hi Lynn,

There's just not an 'on the other hand'. Ally's dead on. I just see folks loyal to Trevor on the other site.

Mike

[lynn cates]

academic procedure

Hello Ally. On the other hand, when a student is caught plagiarising, we must determine first:

1. Is it negligent (as offering a paper without footnotes).

2. Willful copying and pasting another's work.

In either case, we must go to the student, IN PRIVATE, explain the infraction, then assess the appropriate penalty.

I caught a student once, in an electronic class, who merely copied and pasted another student's post. I sent a private message asking why she had done this. She came clean and received a zero for that assignment.

By rule I am forbidden to post a message in the classroom along the lines of, "Did you see what "Mary" did? What vermin! What ought to be done to her?" (Fantasies don't count--heh-heh.)

Cheers.
LC

[Magpie]

Just as an aside to what Ally was saying, and not referring to any particular case, I find it sad and alarming that in this age where the consequences of violating copyright are so dire, and there is an entire industry devoted to finding and prosecuting such violations, there seems to be a depressing decrease in people's understand of how copyrights, and plagiarism, work. People seem to honestly believe that "because I want to" is a valid "fair use" argument.

I remembered when we all watched with appalled fascination as another infamous Ripper "author" produced a book that contained almost nothing but pilfered prose--today such as event probably wouldn't evince more than a shrug and a rolling of the eyes.

[Ally]

And if those individuals don't feel that we should be told about facts like these, which go to the heart of the credibility of a prominent Ripper researcher, I can only marvel.

This was one of the main things that puzzled me. I could not believe people were questioning WHY this article was published in Ripperology. People do understand the concept of investigative journalism and academic rigor and making sure that foul play does not flourish within the academic ranks, don't they? I mean, seriously who questions it when anyone is exposed for plagiarism or foul doings and says, 'well why was this even brought to light'?

On another site someone actually had the gall to say, (paraphrasing) "well it's not like those authors were going to get money for their work, so what does it matter if Trevor used it". Really? REALLY??!!! So if someone else decides I am not likely to make use of my car, can they come and lift that too? Assuming they'll utilize it to their financial gain since I am clearly not? I mean for god's sake, I cannot believe that someone actually argued 'they weren't using it, so who cares if Trevor stole it'. I just...splutter.

[Monty]

Very disturbing Chris,

Monty

[Chris]

Marks character is being attacked predominantly by Trevor, and this is understandable considering it is he who was exposed, its a defence mechanism of his and I think we all (including Mark) recognise that.

Yes, sadly that is only to be expected from Trevor Marriott.

But I do think it's quite deplorable that one or two others elsewhere have criticised Mark Ripper for his article. I have just read it and thought it was a scrupulously objective presentation of the facts - which speak for themselves very clearly indeed. And if those individuals don't feel that we should be told about facts like these, which go to the heart of the credibility of a prominent Ripper researcher, I can only marvel.

[lynn cates]

"Well, the world needs ditch diggers too." (Judge Smalls)

Hello Ally. Thanks. I think you are singing my song.

"I recognize that there are systemic problems with academia but that in my opinion leads back to the absolutely idiotic notion that "everyone should go to college"."

Although heretical, a colleague of mine observed recently, "Well, not everyone is cut out for college." (Don't say it aloud, but she was right.)

"the one thing that would STILL absolutely get you booted right out is copyright infringement or plagiarism."

Still will--if it meets the criteria.

"There is absolutely no way to know, from reading his book that large portions of it were written by someone else. Several someone elses."

Can't comment here.

"I realize I am harping on this,"

Not at all. You should hear my choice remarks about students.

"And I didn't believe it was possible to be any more disillusioned about my fellow man than I already was."

Ah, you must be rather young. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Ally]

I recognize that there are systemic problems with academia but that in my opinion leads back to the absolutely idiotic notion that "everyone should go to college". I understand that the dumbing down trend of american academia has directly been attributed to that principle, but I taught at a craptacular community college in the middle of bumblefuk nowhere and the one thing that would STILL absolutely get you booted right out is copyright infringement or plagiarism. Because that is not just a matter of academic principle and honesty (laughable traits in the modern world, I know); it's a matter of legality and lawsuit. There is no institution that I know of, no matter how crappy they are (not talking about online diploma factories) that doesn't teach that plagiarism is a big, big freaking no-no. Freshman comp 101 spends like a week just teaching you how to properly source your materials whether it be by APA standards or other, there is always, ALWAYS a set standard on how to source for that institution and it is rigorously adhered to. When I went to college as an English major I had to learn MLA and then later in Master's coursework I had to switch to APA and if I for a second got the two confused in minor detail, I'd be screwed. It was not even about citing, it was about properly citing. And frankly, I would not have cared if Trevor had properly cited or not, as long as he actually cited and gave credit to the proper authors for the work that they did. He did not do that. There is absolutely no way to know, from reading his book that large portions of it were written by someone else. Several someone elses.

I realize I am harping on this, but I am appalled. I'd cut him major slack if he just admitted he was sorry, but he completely shrugs this off as if was nothing. I get freaked out about karma if I forget to pay for something that was under my purse in the grocery cart and I didn't realize it until I get out to the car. I have to go back to the store to pay for a 20 cent jalapeno pepper. And people look at me like I am crazy when I do that. But that's the standard I apply to taking what is not mine. He took someone else's hard work and took money for it. That's theft and worse than theft of a stereo. In the world of academia, the standard applies, publish or perish. People rely on publishing for their very livelihood, their ideas and work are the foundation of their existence. I consider this a big deal. I may be one of the only ones in the world who does, as I am slowly beginning to realize, but taking someone's work, their sweat and blood and effort and taking money for what you did not produce is just ...wrong. It's wrong, and I am dumbfounded that so many people don't believe it is. I am ...disillusioned, I suppose. And I didn't believe it was possible to be any more disillusioned about my fellow man than I already was.

[lynn cates]

academia and adjuncts

Hello Ally. Don't mean to highjack but . . .

"I am scared stiff at what this means for the future of academia."

No sarcasm intended, but why do you think that academia even HAS a future?

About 30 years ago, many universities cut back on full time professors and replaced them with contract people. This phenomenon has increased--as many phenomena do--over the years. Back then, at LEAST you needed to be a PhD or ABD to become adjunct. Soon, only an MA in field required. Now, it's MA (any field) but only 18 hours required in teaching field.

Now, it has gotten to the point that some of my colleagues have become laughingstocks amongst students because they do not know the material they "teach." (Try looking at "Ratemyprofessors.com".)

To get a feel for this, look at lists of nations and where they stood educationally then and compare to now. See what I mean?

Cheers.
LC

[Ally]

All I have to say is reading the responses regarding attribution that some people are making, some of them actual researchers and writers, I am scared stiff at what this means for the future of academia. It appears half of them don't even understand what constitutes plagiarism and what constitutes appropriate attribution.

Christ almighty people, a thanks in the acknowledgement page after you've ripped an entire chapter of other people's material is NOT proper attribution.

It's freaking scary that people don't know this.