Unbeknown to most in the Malaysian universities, there is a plagiarism case heard and decided in the High Court. This is a case of a masters thesis which was later discovered to be 75% plagiarised. The East Coast university found the complaint to be valid and annulled the award after an inquiry. This masters student was by then a young lecturer scholarship holder pursing PhD at the very same university. The student sued the university.
The Judge agreed that there was compelling evidence that the master thesis claimed to be the student’s, was in fact, the work of others which was not disclosed. But the Judge asked some troubling questions. How did the supervisor who monitored the writing over a duration missed the plagiarism? What does it mean to approve the thesis for submission and viva? Why did the thesis assessment by two examiners miss this glaring plagiarism? Why was the student not given the opportunity to be heard before the decision to annul the award?
Obviously, there were some procedural defects which is dear to the Judge.
Because of the grievous failure of the university processes, the Judge rejected the annulment of the masters award. The student left the university and there ends the story although I am not sure what happen to the publications which, in all probability, has the supervisor’s name too.
The takeaway from this is - supervisors watch over your charges. More so because your name appears in all the publications that is generated from the work. Be more mindful when you sign off on the dotted line in approving the thesis for viva. Nominate examiners who truly know the field and have the independence to critically evaluate and flag potential plagiarism issues. Don’t rely completely on text matching services like Turnitin. Check for tell tale signs - language. And give the student the right to be heard before action.
Comments