Prof demoted for plagiarism

Veterinary School Professor Robert Whitlock was demoted for committing plagiarism in a journal article after an over five-year investigation concluded this summer. Whitlock, an equine medicine professor, was demoted to associate professor after the University Trustees voted in June to approve the recommendation of the Vet School's Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility. As part of the sanctions, Whitlock is also forbidden from serving in any administrative position. Whitlock did not receive any reduction in tenure or salary. According to former Faculty Senate Chairperson Robert Davies -- who called a meeting of the faculty to form a Group for Complaint in this case -- this is the first time the University has demoted any faculty member for any violation. Davies added that this is the first time that the "just cause procedure," established in 1959, has gone the whole way. In the past, people usually resigned before the Trustees made a decision about the charges. Davies added that he knows of no other University that would not fire a faculty member for plagiarism, rather than just demoting him. In a letter written by University President Sheldon Hackney in the July 14, 1992 edition of the Almanac, he wrote that the Board of Trustees "would have preferred a more severe penalty." But according to the Suspension and Termination Policy in the University's Faculty Handbook, the Trustees may not impose a harsher penalty than that recommended by the school's Committee on Academic Freedom and Responsibility. Faculty and administrators said this week they strongly oppose the retention of a plagiarist on the University's faculty. "Plagiarism is one of the most serious offenses that can occur in the University," said Provost Michael Aiken. "When it occurs, it should be dealt swiftly and in ways that are commensurate with the seriousness of the action. It did not happen in this case." Morris Mendelson, chairperson of the University chapter of the American Association of University Professors, said he was not familiar with the details of the Whitlock case, but "if you are a plagiarist, you have no place on the faculty as far as I am concerned." Mendelson added that "the use of demotion as a punishment [in a case of plagiarism] is outrageous" and is not "an acceptable punishment." Faculty Senate Chairperson David Hildebrand said yesterday he is "a little disappointed that there wasn't a more severe action in this case." "[Having a plagiarist on faculty] does some damage to the University reputation. That's for sure," he added. Davies echoed the wider implications of the Whitlock incident. "The reason anyone should listen to [professors] is because they are honest and they have integrity," he said. "If you can't trust what they are saying, then it affects the whole profession." According to Vet School Dean Robert Andrews, another University initially accused Whitlock of plagiarizing in an article that appeared in a scholarly journal. Then, as specified in the Handbook, a faculty-elected Group for Complaint proceeded to prosecute Whitlock. According to Hackney, this is the first time the Group for Complaint has been used. Whitlock did not return several phone calls this week.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.