I just think that she did a really sloppy job on her scholarship which has resulted in plagiarism. As you say, it is basically Illuminaughti shit. It’s trying to come of as having done more work than you have, while decreasing your own workload.
This is definitely strange. I really don't understand why she didn't just reword the sentences, since then it would be acceptable as a quote via indirect speech, since the verbatim copying seems to be the only problem. Was she seriously so uninspired to not be able to restate it in a different word order / with synonyms? And what real contribution does the rest of her work then have? It's just kind of bizzare for me. (Besides the one without any source ofc, that one is just bad practice, but the other ones are strange)
Here’s an interesting question, were her cases of plagarism regarding particularly important topics/insights or mainly just background detail that’s not controversial content-wise. If it’s the former, then she definitely was acting maliciously. But if it’s the latter, I can definitely see it potentially being just a lack of competence or organization. She shouldn’t steal people’s work, but if she were to, I’d forgive it much more if it’s just incompetence, especially if her actually original research is compelling or groundbreaking. If that’s the case, then her academics are a net positive and are worthwhile even despite her theft.
I've worked in academia for a few years at this point and have been pretty shocked at how ignorant students are around plagiarism/citation. That being said, if stuff like this was in her PHD dissertation, I have a hard time imagining someone gets that far without knowing exactly what they're doing.. though it's also an indictment of her PHD program too, frankly.
@@corey3427She def did too many academic dishonesties to be allowed a high admin role in a prestigious university. All I’m saying is that the merits of her works probably far outweigh her transgressions. That makes her work a net positive and thus worthwhile (especially if she can keep her pesky sources cited properly). You don’t become president of harvard if your principal findings are plagiarized. Though if she’s tricksy with plagiarism to get ahead, could she also be tricksy with data collection or falsification? The doubts swirl and it may be a better use of academic time to just blacklist her than go through and scrutinize her work.
yeah that's the problem with plagiarism unfortunately, right? It taints your credibility broadly, and drags down the merits of whatever school let you in. doesn't mean there can't be valid contributions made, but it does beg reevaluation. Doubting the right cares enough to actually maintain interest in that tho, beyond, "black Harvard lady's a LIAR." @@Syzygy_Bliss
lol imagine if she had a TH-cam channel called ‘Gay Writes’
she would've been featured on Hbomberguy's latest video
I just think that she did a really sloppy job on her scholarship which has resulted in plagiarism. As you say, it is basically Illuminaughti shit. It’s trying to come of as having done more work than you have, while decreasing your own workload.
College professors would have Sparta kicked us out of the room if we pulled srtuff like that back in my day.
👴
Why does Hbomb's chin fit so perfectly in the corner of the thumbnail?
This is definitely strange. I really don't understand why she didn't just reword the sentences, since then it would be acceptable as a quote via indirect speech, since the verbatim copying seems to be the only problem. Was she seriously so uninspired to not be able to restate it in a different word order / with synonyms? And what real contribution does the rest of her work then have? It's just kind of bizzare for me. (Besides the one without any source ofc, that one is just bad practice, but the other ones are strange)
Here’s an interesting question, were her cases of plagarism regarding particularly important topics/insights or mainly just background detail that’s not controversial content-wise. If it’s the former, then she definitely was acting maliciously. But if it’s the latter, I can definitely see it potentially being just a lack of competence or organization.
She shouldn’t steal people’s work, but if she were to, I’d forgive it much more if it’s just incompetence, especially if her actually original research is compelling or groundbreaking.
If that’s the case, then her academics are a net positive and are worthwhile even despite her theft.
You mean ... her dissertation? ... among her other research.
I've worked in academia for a few years at this point and have been pretty shocked at how ignorant students are around plagiarism/citation. That being said, if stuff like this was in her PHD dissertation, I have a hard time imagining someone gets that far without knowing exactly what they're doing.. though it's also an indictment of her PHD program too, frankly.
@@corey3427She def did too many academic dishonesties to be allowed a high admin role in a prestigious university. All I’m saying is that the merits of her works probably far outweigh her transgressions. That makes her work a net positive and thus worthwhile (especially if she can keep her pesky sources cited properly). You don’t become president of harvard if your principal findings are plagiarized.
Though if she’s tricksy with plagiarism to get ahead, could she also be tricksy with data collection or falsification? The doubts swirl and it may be a better use of academic time to just blacklist her than go through and scrutinize her work.
yeah that's the problem with plagiarism unfortunately, right? It taints your credibility broadly, and drags down the merits of whatever school let you in. doesn't mean there can't be valid contributions made, but it does beg reevaluation. Doubting the right cares enough to actually maintain interest in that tho, beyond, "black Harvard lady's a LIAR." @@Syzygy_Bliss
neri oxman & bill “can you ‘plagiarize’ wikipedia?” ackman next?
Clearly reliable thread from good ol Chrissy ruffie