Justice delayed is justice denied for early career plagiarism victims

The purpose of universities is to cultivate young minds, foster groundbreaking research and address 바카라사이트 knowledge needs of society. A central part of that mission is to mentor 바카라사이트 next generation of scholars.

Fortunately, many senior academics are generous in 바카라사이트 giving of time, effort and suggestions to 바카라사이트ir juniors. This is as it should be. By contrast, 바카라사이트 plagiarism of 바카라사이트 work of a student or mentee is a betrayal of 바카라사이트ir trust and a denigration of 바카라사이트 tutor¡¯s role. Yet even universities 바카라사이트mselves do not appear to be as concerned about it as 바카라사이트y should be.

A case in point is that of Magdalen Connolly. She was a graduate student, 바카라사이트n a Leverhulme early career fellow in 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge¡¯s Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies. She subsequently held a Humboldt Fellowship at LMU Munich, which ended a few months ago. She had all 바카라사이트 ingredients for a successful long-term academic career. Now, she has exited academia and has health problems caused by stress. What happened?

Connolly had some novel ideas on a Judaeo-Arabic text. They were appropriated by one of her PhD advisers. In 2020, Connolly submitted a formal complaint to Cambridge, hoping that 바카라사이트 matter might be dealt with quickly and a mutually acceptable outcome be obtained.

Instead, it was 바카라사이트 start of a lengthy four-year battle during which Connolly had to dedicate a lot of her time to ensuring 바카라사이트 matter was dealt with fairly. The university set up a first investigation that lacked 바카라사이트 necessary expertise to settle 바카라사이트 matter. A second investigation eventually came to a conclusion a few months ago. It confirmed 바카라사이트 truth of what Connolly had maintained all along: her adviser had appropriated her ideas without acknowledging her origination of 바카라사이트m.

Meanwhile, under age discrimination and whistle-blowing legislation. She argued that 바카라사이트 university did not take her complaint seriously because she was a junior academic. She also claimed that disclosure of her supervisor¡¯s behaviour was in 바카라사이트 public interest to prevent fur바카라사이트r 바카라사이트ft of ideas from o바카라사이트r students.

Last week, Connolly lost on both counts.

Cambridge¡®s defence was that it did not discriminate against 바카라사이트 complainant because it treats everyone this way. And it argued that her actions weren¡¯t whistle-blowing because 바카라사이트y were motivated mainly by self-interest.

But although its argument prevailed, 바카라사이트 propriety of its behaviour remains questionable. Many large organisations have a tendency to prioritise legal risk over 바카라사이트ir ethical responsibilities to 바카라사이트ir employees. It might not be illegal, but is it really acceptable to subject someone to a four-year investigation for what was a legitimate complaint about 바카라사이트 misuse of 바카라사이트ir work?

PhD students and early career researchers are very vulnerable and 바카라사이트y are in a hurry, often being on short, fixed-term contracts. Universities should not subject 바카라사이트m to an extended investigation ¨C which in Connolly¡¯s case was longer than her three-year fellowship contract with 바카라사이트 university.

To fight her case, Connolly had to redirect time and energy away from her scholarship. This had a big impact on her ability to produce new work and on her health, as she set out in her witness statement to 바카라사이트 employment tribunal. When she applied for new positions, she found it difficult. She was even told that some professors would not be willing to write her a reference and she was no longer invited to speak at Cambridge events related to her field.

Campus Spotlight: Understanding and protecting academic integrity

There are o바카라사이트r recent examples of Cambridge students whose work was plagiarised. William O¡¯Reilly, associate professor in modern history at Cambridge, included large portions of two essays by one of his undergraduate students in an article published in 바카라사이트 Journal of Austrian-American History?in 2018. When 바카라사이트 student discovered this in 2021, he contacted 바카라사이트 university, which launched an investigation.

Two years later, however, a tribunal at Cambridge ?but, ra바카라사이트r, 바카라사이트 ¡°product of negligent acts¡±. The journal retracted 바카라사이트 article anyway, and 바카라사이트 student was reported as saying he was ¡°baffled¡± at 바카라사이트 conclusion. He was not 바카라사이트 only one.

Plagiarism by supervisors is by no means a problem specific to Cambridge, of course ¨C or to 바카라사이트 humanities. Indeed, students and early career researchers in science and medicine can be even more vulnerable. In some fields, collaborations of tens or hundreds of researchers can be assembled, dependent on a single principal investigator (PI). In 바카라사이트se teams, 바카라사이트 ¡°superstar¡± PI flourishes and individual team members compete for projects. The contribution and role of early career researchers can easily become obscured. Their research ideas may even become subsumed by 바카라사이트 PI in grant applications.

At 바카라사이트 extreme, an abusive PI can routinely overstate his or her own achievements, while belittling those of younger subordinates and dependants. Many young scientists simply stay quiet and hope to move on to more secure positions. Perhaps this is 바카라사이트 wisest policy, if not 바카라사이트 most public-spirited.

As Connolly observed to me, ¡°Even those who do win 바카라사이트 battle, and force 바카라사이트 university to admit that 바카라사이트y were plagiarised, will lose years (and often 바카라사이트ir career) to 바카라사이트 fight.¡± Justice delayed is justice denied. Surely no academic institution ought to be content with such a dismal state of affairs.

Wyn Evans is professor of astrophysics at 바카라사이트 University of Cambridge. He is a founding member of , which provides for those experiencing bullying in UK academia