In addition to the existing reviews of the plagiarism case of Prime Minister Victor Ponta’s PhD thesis, we have received three reviews from Dr Grigore Pop-Eleches (Princeton), Dr Alin Fumurescu (Tulane) and Prof Maria Bucur (Indiana).
The reviews can be found on the dedicated case webpage and are also included below.
We welcome new reviews for this case, which could be sent via our contact page.
Reviews
The thesis contains extensive materials copied word-for-word from publications by other authors [...] the incorporation in this manuscript of several dozen pages worth of uncited materials lifted word-for-word would qualify as a particularly egregious case of plagiarism. [...] plagiarism on this scale would lead to expulsion from the program or [...] to a revocation of the degree. For faculty, the expectation would be that a person found guilty of this type of plagiarism would resign from their position. If the faculty does not resign, then University rules allow for the faculty member to be suspended, dismissed, or be subjected to discriminatory reduction of salary [...] IO_REVEAL1
Q1. Academic conduct. To what extent does the submitted material comply with ethical norms in your field that you are aware of?
The submitted material is in clear violation of the ethical norms in my field. The thesis contains extensive materials copied word-for-word from publications by other authors without the proper use of quotations and footnotes that would indicate which part of the manuscript is original and which draws on outside sources. Technically, even a few sentences that contain unattributed ideas would qualify as plagiarism and this would be the case even if the wording has been changed significantly as long as the ideas and key concepts are being used without proper attribution. There, the incorporation in this manuscript of several dozen pages worth of uncited materials lifted word-for-word (or with at best minor word changes) from a small number of sources (see e.g. the use of long passages from Diaconu 1999 on pp. 30-39, and from Diaconu (1999) and Cretu (1996) on pp. 54-63) would qualify as a particularly egregious case of plagiarism.
Q2. The grey zone. Does the material include writing techniques that are controversial in your field but cannot be qualified fully and clearly as academic misconduct?
The often very complicated issue of grey zone plagiarism is less important in this case given the existence of multiple and extensive instances of verbatim uncited incorporation of entire passages from other sources mentioned above in Q1.
Q2. Significance. What would be the outcome and impact if one of your colleagues published a similar work? (You may think of any conceivable sanctions or impact on research, institution, public perception etc.)
The academic reputation and public perception of a person committing such extensive plagiarism would be severely damaged. The sanctions are usually decided by a university-appointed panel and depend on the extent and severity of the plagiarism and the academic position of the person committing the offence. At my institution, Princeton University, in the case of doctoral students, plagiarism on this scale would lead to expulsion from the program, or, if the degree has already been granted to a revocation of the degree. For faculty, the expectation would be that a person found guilty of this type of plagiarism would resign from their position. If the faculty does not resign, then University rules allow for the faculty member to be “suspended, dismissed, or be subjected to discriminatory reduction of salary” depending on the gravity of the offense, and in this case the most likely outcome would be outright dismissal, i.e. termination of the contract. It is worth noting that in American academia plagiarism on this scale can have disciplinary repercussions not only for the student engaging in plagiarism but also for any advisors who are aware of the practice and do not take the appropriate steps to correct the situation.IO_REVEAL0
Dr Grigore Pop-Eleches
Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs
Princeton University, USA
[The thesis] it does not comply with any ethical norms, by any stretch of imagination. [...] All Honor Codes that I am familiar with in the United States have zero tolerance for this practice [...] Any university is ‘worth’ only as much as the general public thinks it is, and a case of obvious plagiarism left unpunished would damage the reputation on the institution irreversibly. What I found worrisome in the particular case of Victor Ponta is the message sent out: political might makes academic right. No educational system can survive on such premises. [...] IO_REVEAL1
Q1. Academic conduct. To what extent does the submitted material comply with ethical norms in your field that you are aware of?
Unfortunately, it does not comply with any ethical norms, by any stretch of imagination. If an undergraduate student would plagiarize to this extent, most likely she or he would be expulsed from the college/university. All Honor Codes that I am familiar with in the United States have zero tolerance for this practice, including the ones where the words are not verbatim or the plagiarism was done ‘in good faith’, accidentally. Obviously, none of the two categories apply to this case.
In the case of PhD students, the procedure distinguishes between plagiarism from a source within the public domain and plagiarism from other sources. If the unacknowledged material comes from a source in the public domain – which is this case -, the principle of ‘absolute liability’ is to be applied whether or not she or he has intended to behave dishonestly.
Furthermore, a doctoral student may not use as a defense the failure by the supervisor (or any other member of the academic staff) to detect academic misconduct at an earlier stage. In such cases, depending on the gravity of the case, the penalties vary from exclusion of the affected work from consideration, to re-examination, or termination of the candidature.
Q2. The grey zone. Does the material include writing techniques that are controversial in your field but cannot be qualified fully and clearly as academic misconduct?
There are indeed cases that are controversial and the members of the board committee may disagree on the final verdict. But once again, this is a clear-cut case of verbatim reproduction extended over some one hundred pages or so.
Q2. Significance. What would be the outcome and impact if one of your colleagues published a similar work? (You may think of any conceivable sanctions or impact on research, institution, public perception etc.)
This is a hardly conceivable situation. However, if something like this would happen, the respective individual would be banished from the academic community, no questions asked. Any university is ‘worth’ only as much as the general public thinks it is, and a case of obvious plagiarism left unpunished would damage the reputation on the institution irreversibly. What I found worrisome in the particular case of Victor Ponta is the message sent out: political might makes academic right. No educational system can survive on such premises.IO_REVEAL0
Dr Alin Fumurescu
Department of Political Science
Tulane University, USA
The thesis can be categorized indubitably as academic misconduct. At Indiana University, where I have been teaching since 1996, presenting the “cut and paste” compilation of unattributed descriptions, analysis, and syntheses to the extent that they are present in the PhD thesis under discussion would result in dismissal of that PhD candidate from the University for academic misconduct. [...] In an academic environment, a faculty member would be brought up for academic misconduct, and depending on the magnitude of the level of plagiarism,
could be fired or denied tenure [...] IO_REVEAL1
Q1. Academic conduct. To what extent does the submitted material comply with ethical norms in your field that you are aware of?
The thesis and various reports issued by University of Bucharest and experts other than CNESCDTI concur, as do I, that this thesis can be categorized indubitably as academic misconduct. At Indiana University, where I have been teaching since 1996, presenting the “cut and paste” compilation of unattributed descriptions, analysis, and syntheses to the extent that they are present in the PhD thesis under discussion would result in dismissal of that PhD candidate from the University for academic misconduct.
Q2. The grey zone. Does the material include writing techniques that are controversial in your field but cannot be qualified fully and clearly as academic misconduct?
I did not find a gray zone, especially in areas where exact wording, to the point of the same grammatical structure of sentences and use of commas, makes it extremely clear that the exact same text is being presented in 2003 as one’s work, while the text had already been published a year or more prior to Victor Ponta’s thesis. While one isolated occurrence of such an unattributed quote, forgetting also to use quotation marks, might be forgiven, numerous instances, especially of an analytical and synthetic nature, rather than just descriptive, clearly show that the author presented someone else’s interpretation of the problem being addressed as his own.
Q2. Significance. What would be the outcome and impact if one of your colleagues published a similar work? (You may think of any conceivable sanctions or impact on research, institution, public perception etc.)
Very recently, Fareek Zakaria was suspended by Time Magazine for plagiarizing the work of Jill Lapore, a contributor to the New Yorker. In an academic environment, a faculty member would be brought up for academic misconduct, and depending on the magnitude of the level of plagiarism,
could be fired or denied tenure.IO_REVEAL0
Prof Maria Bucur
John W. Hill Chair of European History, Department of History
Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences
Indiana University, USA