Harvard University President Accused of Plagiarizing PhD Thesis

this seems a bit more egregious than citation error… and even if the mistake was made three or four times in 50 publications just say sorry and fix it. But this appears to be bigger than that.

 

Based on the accusations I reviewed, I disagree. Like I said, if I'm Gay, I'm using software to go back through the works of university presidents and major scholars. Because I am quite skeptical that she's the only person out there who has used similar language to other scholars when citing to similar works. IMO, there's a fundamental difference between passing off ideas as your own that you are borrowing and using similar language to paraphrase a similar source.

EDIT: And it's worth noting she did issue corrections.

 

Ok I’ve dug in and done some more reading. The stuff in her dissertation was pretty bad but she issued a correction. I hadn’t seen that. That’s fine.
There’s some other stuff that deserves correction and it hasn’t been. Idk I think if you went back and looked closely at most researchers you wouldn’t actually see that many citation errors that require official correction. But I guess I’m more torn than I was before.

 

The issue I have is it feels like the line is pretty arbitrary. Here's an example:

Of the examples I reviewed, this was arguably the worst. But even still, it doesn't feel like a big deal to me. I believe she issued a correction by citing to Williamson, but the only thing Williamson really added was the "subsidized and unsubsidized" point (which may also have been in the original source somewhere, but I didn't see it on the page that offered the one-sixth data).

The data and findings weren't Williamson's, and Gay didn't directly lift Williamson's "both subsidized and unsubsidized" language. So where is the line where paraphrasing becomes plagiarism, particularly when both people are summarizing the same findings from the same source (and both citing to that source)?

Are there more egregious examples out there?

 

You gotta think anyone who is published who committed blatant plagiarism is absolutely screwed by incoming AI. Sort of like DNA advances are screwing serial killers. It will all be scanned eventually.

 

Especially if we're defining "plagiarism" this expansively.

 

BTW, @slayerxing, if you can, I recommend reading through this thread on Twitter:


It shows how absurd the vast majority of the charges of "plagiarism" are. It also highlights a couple examples of legitimate citation errors she made (errors I believe she offered corrections for).

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/12/23/claudine-gay-harvard-resign-plagiarism/

Perhaps the most disturbing example is the least academic — Gay’s borrowing of words from another scholar, Jennifer L. Hochschild. In her acknowledgments for a 1996 book, Hochschild described a mentor who “showed me the importance of getting the data right and of following where they lead without fear or favor” and “drove me much harder than I sometimes wanted to be driven.”



Gay’s dissertation thanked her thesis adviser, who “reminded me of the importance of getting the data right and following where they lead without fear or favor,” and her family, “drove me harder than I sometimes wanted to be driven.”

 

Interesting coincidence, Jennifer Hochschild is one of the people who recruited Claudine Gay and convinced her to come to Harvard. They appear to be friends.
The Scholar Everyone Sought: Claudine Gay, Harvard’s Next President | News | The Harvard Crimson

 

I really don’t care either way, but it seems like if a student were caught doing the same thing there would probably be some degree of consequences, but for Harvard President, it is ok. It also gives the appearance of her getting special treatment because she is a minority female (which may or may not be true, just the appearance )

There’s no doubt there are those out there mostly on the right looking for cultural pound of flesh victory. But that doesn’t mean that Harvard ultimately shouldn’t do what is right.

 

Did Alan Dershowitz receive special treatment for being a "minority female"?

(Also, is it even possible to commit plagiarism in the acknowledgments section while thanking people?)

 

One note about citations. For those that don’t engage in research writing it’s not always easy and clear cut who all to cite sometimes and there aren’t clear cut rules on paraphrasing etiquette across disciplines. Further, a proper citation might require you to cite a dozen manuscripts but page limits on journal submissions might force you to select the 3 or 4 best ones and journals also don’t always like a lot of direct quotations so you’re forced to paraphrase.

 

No doubt has more to do with her comments that he sees as anti-semitism than anything to do with plagiarism. She’s got a lot of powerful Jewish people trying to cancel her.

 

Ackman is another one of those billionaire Jewish guys who doesn’t like her because she’s “anti-Semitic.” The plagiarism shit is a red herring.

 

We should start a Go Fund Me and get gatormonk a Harvard t-shirt to help fuel his obsession.

Quarter anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

 

There should be little or no scholarly implications in the Acknowledgements section of a dissertation. Plagiarize away, as long as it's not about the research.