I disagree with your statement that Ohio University President McDavis handled the Russ College of Engineering's plagiarism scandal as well as can be expected (The Post editorial: Call and response, May 9). Since I first discovered published student plagiarism and presented it to OU administrators in July 2004, President McDavis has carelessly passed on multiple opportunities to protect the credibility and value of an OU degree. Here are some examples:
On December 3, 2004, a few months after Dean Irwin declined my offer to provide evidence of plagiarism (and jokingly threatened to sue me), I mailed examples of obvious plagiarism from two OU master's theses to President McDavis. Aside from a verbal reprimand from Dean Irwin, there was no response from the president or other administrators. Both theses remained cataloged and available to the public for more than 18 months until Hugh Bloemer and Gary Meyer stepped in. What did the president do with the concrete evidence of academic misconduct? Did he advise administrators to act on information brought to their attention? Why did he not take steps to ensure that there was no retaliation against me?
On May 5, 2005, The Post published the article Theses questioned by Suzanne Wilder. That article makes several specific references to theses with plagiarism. Again, all of the theses with plagiarism remained cataloged and available to the public for more than one year. Did the president or any administrators read the front page article of the school newspaper? If so, did anyone contact The Post for further details?
On September 29, 2006, The Post published the article New plagiarism cases suspected by Sean Gaffney. That article provides a specific example of plagiarism by quoting from the results sections of two OU theses obtained from Alden Library. This was not a new case. Months prior, I had provided the evidence to OU Legal Affairs, and I discussed the case with a graduate chair. Two weeks ago, when the thesis with plagiarism was made available electronically, the chair of the Russ College Research Integrity Committee informed me that President McDavis decided to accept the findings of the Russ College Academic Honesty Oversight Committee, which dismissed this case and others that have since been called back into question. Why?
Earlier this year, President McDavis further undermined the value of all OU degrees when he allowed the acceptance and publication of rewritten master's theses. Students and alumni are now forced to accept the fact that their degrees are no different than those of admitted cheaters. Who has ever heard of an accredited university that allows students to complete their degree requirements years after the degrees were conferred? Was there any consultation with students and alumni before the decision was made to uphold the graduate degrees of admitted plagiarists?
President McDavis might have inherited the plagiarism problem, but as the leader of Ohio University, he had an obligation to promptly act on allegations of academic misconduct. Instead, he and several other administrators tried to ignore this very serious threat to the credibility of honest OU students, professors and alumni. For nearly three years now, President McDavis has irresponsibly allowed the plagiarism scandal to fester, and under his leadership, the value of an OU degree has fallen to rock bottom.
Tom Matrka is a 2005 graduate of OU and writes from Hamden, Ohio.
17 Archives
Letter to the Editor
