University Musings October 24, 2014: Sexism & Plagiarism in Academia: The Case of Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History Election 2004 Project

EDUCATION BUZZ

EDUCATION & UNIVERSITY MUSINGS

Sexism & Plagiarism in Academia: The Case of Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History Election 2004 Project

By Bonnie K. Goodman

The mistreatment of a female writer might turn into a possible case of plagiarism at Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History in Dallas, Texas in their Election 2004 project. SMU’s Presidential History Center has coerced submissions to their upcoming Election 2004 website project on the presidential campaign. They accepted entries, were completely satisfied with the writing, but then after refused to publish the author’s articles and give the author credit, using a ridiculous excuse unrelated to the actual entries or quality of writing, paid this author off, and then intend to hire someone to write the same entries, presumably from the model of the original author’s work. I know this going to happen, because I was the author taken advantage of in this situation. I am a woman, do not have a PhD or university affiliation, therefore I was an easy target.

This past spring I answered a call to write entries for Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History’s Election 2004 project on the presidential campaign and election. I was in contact with Dr. Brian Franklin, the project head and associate director. I was selected to write the entries on the Democratic National Convention and Ralph Nader, and then I was offered to write about John Kerry because in Dr. Franklin’s words I “seem[ed] so keen (and experienced!) on writing.” In the intervening time between accepting to work on the project and the deadline for submission I had a family emergency; the ongoing situation set me behind in my work, I had promised to get the entries in by the end of June, but I could not.

During the summer months, I thought Dr. Franklin might have gotten someone else to write those entries, but then out of nowhere he emailed me on Sept. 9 appealing to me if I could still send the entries in, telling me he wants to me to submit them because as he wrote, “you have got so much great writing experience.” I sent two of them, the Kerry and DNC entries, to which Dr. Franklin told me “extremely thorough!” in an email on Thursday, Sept. 18, 2014. The only problem, I was having trouble was shortening the entries, I felt in doing so I would depriving them of vital information and watering them too much considering the importance of the topics. I told Dr. Franklin this when I sent the revised entries and the one on Ralph Nader on Sept. 21, 2014. It should not have been news to Dr. Franklin that I wrote long articles, I routinely write feature length articles, and of the over 400 articles I have written for Examiner.com I have written only a handful are less than 1000 words.

Then to my surprise two days later, Dr. Franklin, tells me he would have to wait and see until November if he intends to even use the entries. I obviously felt like a fool, I was not even intending to continue to participate in the project, I was intending to use the entries I had written for my own blog. Then out of the blue, Dr. Franklin emails me, tells me the first two entries I sent were good, and tricked me to write and submit the third entry. After he received all my work, three different versions of the entries at varying lengths and my research, which he can neatly edit and alter and then not give me author credit, he tells me he might not use them and will not pay me until he decides.

I responded and told him how I felt about CPH using my research and my “thorough” articles. As Dr. Franklin had previously agreed with me, there is very limited information on the 2004 campaign. It ranks as one of the most insignificant presidential campaigns in history, except for President Barack Obama’s entry onto the public stage at the DNC and the results little else is even remembered. It is because of the limited sources on the campaign that makes it so easy to plagiarize my work. Any rewrites he does or has anybody do now that he has my work will be close to plagiarism. In the end, I sacrificed the quality of the content and edited the entries to the exact requested word limit, to which Dr. Franklin seemed satisfied, and agreed to use them and pay me for my work.

Everything was fine until the Ebola outbreak, I did not want to receive mail from Dallas, Texas while there was a panic there, the fact that SMU is so close to Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital, made me more uneasy. Why should I living in Canada be concerned and involved in this issue so far away? Dr. Franklin told me the check would come from Oregon, but I was nervous as millions of Americans are about the outbreak, and since the payment information had been I already been transferred to the accounts payable office, I emailed them asked where exactly the check would be coming from. It was not something I did to be offensive; I had a concern especially at the height of this issue, as did millions of Americans.

Dr. Franklin seemed to take great offense by this. Even though since then there has been more Ebola cases since then and everyone was in a panic or at the very least concerned about this issue. On Oct. 6, Dr. Franklin writes me “Finally, considering the correspondence that we have had thus far, I believe it is in our best interest to part ways at this point. Therefore, I want to inform you that we will not be publishing your articles on our website.” Although I was “paid” for my work, I was told I and everyone writing entries for the project held the copyright to their work, which is what makes the possibility of plagiarism even more offensive. I feel being paid was meant to hush me not to make an issue of not being published and given credit for my work, but as all authors the writing credit and being published is what matters the most.

I personally believe when Dr. Franklin emailed me in September he had no intention of publishing my entries giving me an author credit, he just wanted my research and writing because of “my great writing experience.” From the minute I submitted them he started saying he would not publish them, why probably, because I do not have a PhD, I am not a professor, and I am a women he thinks it makes it more easier to treat me this way. His decision to not publish my entries has nothing to do with any communication I had with him, and as I told him, as long as the work is good, he should include my entries in the project. Dr. Franklin or CPH does not have to hire me again, but neither does they have to behave in such unprofessional matter, insult and make a fool of me. It is hard not to presume the worst, Dr. Franklin wanted me to submit all three entries and then when they were perfect and complete, he decides he will not publish them. How can I not feel that my writing was going to be altered, the research modified and used, but someone else given the author credit. No one would ever believe any doctorate needs to plagiarize off someone with only a master’s degree, so it is safe to do it.

I even contacted the Director of the Center for Presidential History, Jeffrey Engel about this issue and any possible plagiarism. I had known Professor Engel, he is one of the last professors I included on the Top Young Historians feature in 2010, I edited while working at the History News Network. As the chief decision maker of the feature, I decided to include Professor Engel on the list. The email, I received on Monday, Oct. 20, 2014 was an attempt to assure me my work would not be plagiarized, writing “this simply will not happen” and  that “I will nonetheless personally oversee their final work in order to assure that there can be, as you put it, “no hint” of plagiarism.” Still my entries would not be included in the project, why, no answer was given, it certainly was not because of my writing,

How can I believe them that my writing will not be copied in any way, shape or form. I was approached, tricked into submitting all three entries, then even before I said or could do anything wrong there was insinuations that my work would not be used with my name as the author. The sources are limited, even if there will be no word for word plagiarism, with all three versions at their disposable, paraphrasing, using the same sources is all considered plagiarism. If not Rick Perlstein would not be locked into controversy over the use of the same sources and quotes in his book “The Invisible Bridge: The Fall of Nixon and the Rise of Reagan” as in Craig Shirley’s “The Reagan Revolution: The Untold Story of the Campaign That Started It All.” In addition, I was paid to keep me satisfied and presumably quiet. How can I not believe if I was paid, they are going to pay someone and not use something from the work they paid me for, nobody pays someone for work if they do not plan to use it. The events are even more surprising given that the SMU is the home of President George W. Bush’s library, museum  and presidential center, why would a department at the university even attempt such a thing. Even the smell of plagiarism or any academic misconduct accusation would be an embarrassment for the entire institution.

This is not the first time my work would be used without being given the proper author credit or treated fairly because I was a woman without a PhD. In the fall of 2009, I worked for a former professor of mine, who was the latest editor working on the fourth edition of Fred L. Israel, and Arthur Meier Schlesinger’s “History of American Presidential Elections, 1789-2008.” I worked on writing and researching the overviews and chronologies, which was the biggest addition to this new edition besides entries on the 2004 and 2008 campaigns. It was four months of grueling hell, working sweatshop hours, typing until my figures bled; it destroyed my health. This professor remained coy, but alluded that I would be given a contributor credit. When I asked, he kept saying he could not confirm contributor credit with the editor at the publisher Facts on File until I finished the work, but used the credit as motivation to complete the project.

In the end, I was never given that writer credit, instead receiving a little line in the acknowledgements, with the words, “Bonnie Goodman undertook the Herculean task of compiling the first drafts of the impressive election overviews and chronologies.” Would I have been so undermined if I had been a man or a PhD, probably not. This same professor often took my ideas from private conversations to use in his own work, op-eds, projects, etc, where I was never attributed or quoted. Years after I no longer speak to him, he is writing a book about a topic, Bill Clinton and the 1990s I told him to write about it back in 2001 when I was only an undergraduate and I conducted research for him on his biography of Hilary Clinton. I mentioned it again when he wrote a similar styled book on Ronald Reagan and the 1980s. I even did extra research for him in 2001, collecting primary sources on the topic, which I am certain he is using and of course I will not be given any credit for my role.

Even when I was the Editor / Features Editor at HNN, History News Network, I was subjected to unfair treatment, because I was a woman without a PhD. While I edited the popular and well respected feature Top Young Historians, I edited a number of other features History Buzz and History Doyens, but in 2007 I was no longer writing articles, as I had in my first year as an intern, when I contributed nearly 20 articles. I yearned to write, but when I asked the editor-in-chief he told me I could not write op-eds for HNN, because I did not have a PhD. Neither did the editor for that matter, he dropped out of the history doctorate program at Harvard University in the late 1970s, without receiving even an MA, but he worked as journalist, wrote best-selling history books, all without the degree.

At that time, I had already had my Masters in Library and Information Studies, and done three additional years of graduate work, instead I was relegated to write the “On This Day in History” feature, because it was based on facts, but no opinion. As anyone writing for Examiner.com knows, you do not have to have a PhD to write your opinions; in fact, most editorial writers do not have doctorates. Fast forward three years to 2010, despite my contributions to HNN, and my masthead ranking second under the editor-in-chief, I see myself being replaced by a college junior, who obviously did not even have a bachelors degree, never mind, PhD. Why did it not matter then, why was he later allowed to write opinion pieces, and articles, become the editor of the entire website publication without a doctorate or even being a graduate student, the difference he was a man and a woman. My whole time at HNN, I was the token female on the editorial staff, HNN has been always for the most part a good old boys club.

My experiences shed light on how PhD and professors in academia take advantage of writers who although experts in their areas do not have a doctorate. I am librarian, a journalist, an editor and a historian who considers herself an independent scholar. It is difficult to gain respect in the academic world enough as a women, one without the golden degree, it is impossible. When I was in library school a professor of mine constantly discussed the disrespect professors had for librarians, including him, even though he had a PhD and the Master Library Science degree and in reality was the more educated one, there is a natural condescension for librarians in the university hierarchy; I already have that against me.

Despite the fact the more women are graduating with doctorates in the humanities now, there is still sexism in the profession. Men because they are losing supremacy, try even more to dominate, intimate, and use women. For all feminism’s fight for equality between the sexes, that goal has still yet to be reached. More women have to speak up and tell what is going on, or else in the future places like Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History will think they can mistreat women and attempt plagiarism just because they think they can get away with it, without anybody ever finding out.

NOTE: The content of this article is based on my personal experiences, names are left out to preserve the privacy of the persons I am speaking about, however, if required, emails can be produced to prove the contents of this article.  

University Musings October 21, 2014: Sexism in Academia: The Case of Southern Methodist University Election 2004 site

EDUCATION BUZZ

EDUCATION & UNIVERSITY MUSINGS

Sexism in Academia: The Case of Southern Methodist University Election 2004 site

By Bonnie K. Goodman

The mistreatment of a female writer might turn into a possible case of plagiarism at Southern Methodist University’s Center for Presidential History in Dallas, Texas in their Election 2004 project. SMU’s Presidential History…October 21, 2014…READ MORE

History Buzz March 22, 2014: Paul Boller, well-known presidential scholar and a TCU professor emeritus, dies at 97

HISTORY BUZZ: HISTORY NEWS RECAP

History Buzz

HISTORY BUZZ: HISTORY NEWS RECAP

Paul Boller, well-known presidential scholar and a TCU professor emeritus, dies at 97

Source: Star-Telegram, 3-22-14

Mr. Boller, a professor emeritus of history at Texas Christian University, died last week in Fort Worth after a brief illness. He was 97….READ MORE

History Buzz Historian Passings October 19, 2011: John Morton Blum Iconic Historian Passes Away

HISTORY BUZZ: HISTORY NEWS RECAPHistory Buzz

HISTORY BUZZ: HISTORY NEWS RECAp

HISTORIAN PASSINGS: REMEMBERING JOHN MORTON BLUM

Source: Yale Daily News, 10-19-11

John Morton Blum, a legendary American history professor who inspired thousands of students during his 34-year career at Yale, died Monday morning of complications with pneumonia in North Branford, Conn. He was 90.

Widely regarded as one of the most influential historians of the late 20th century, Blum helped to forge the modern field of American history through his prolific scholarship and writing. In his long tenure at the University, Blum drew hundreds of students to his lectures each year and taught some of Yale’s most famous political alumni. His passion for academics and his dedicated mentorship of students motivated many who passed through his graduate classes to become professors at universities across the country.

photo

YDN archives

“He of course has a great reputation as a pre-eminent American history scholar,” former Vermont Governor Howard Dean ’71, who took an undergraduate history course with Blum, said in an email Tuesday. “But he could also make history come alive to undergraduate students and he did that for many years. We were incredibly lucky to have him as a teacher.”

Blum came to Yale with a lifelong interest in history and firsthand experience in some of its defining moments.

Born in 1921, Blum grew up in Manhattan and Long Island before attending first Phillips Academy Andover and then Harvard University on scholarship. A year after graduating college in 1943, he travelled to the South Pacific as a member of the United States Navy in World War II. Blum wed his college sweetheart, Pamela Zink Blum, immediately before his deployment, and the marriage lasted for the remainder of his life.

When he returned from the war, Blum continued his history studies and eventually became a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1948. But just nine years later, Blum arrived at Yale as a full professor — joining the ranks of fellow faculty members C. Vann Woodward and Edmund S. Morgan, who were influential historians of the time, and entering campus at a time when the University was experiencing great changes.

As Yale dealt with a tenure crisis in the mid-1960s, struggled to keep the school open during the Vietnam War and worked to incorporate women into the faculty and student body, Blum helped to ease the tensions these issues raised among the faculty, Yale historian Gaddis Smith ’54 GRD ’61 said.

“He was dedicated to the history and to the management of things,” Smith said. “He had a real knowledge of how higher education worked.”

During that time, Blum became the chairman of the History Department and was known among the department’s faculty for his peacemaking abilities, said Morgan, a professor emeritus of history and one of Blum’s closest friends. Morgan added that Blum’s dislike for conflict and his administrative talents led many to believe he would ascend to a deanship or presidency at Yale.

Despite those expectations, Blum remained a professor throughout his time at the University, teaching a number of history courses to both undergraduate and graduate students. Blum’s most famous course ­— History 35 — focused on the populist era, Wilsonian progressivism and New Deal liberalism, and consistently filled all 667 seats in the Law School Auditorium, Blum’s former student William Lilley III GRD ’65 said. The class drew students from every major, Lilley said, adding that Blum was considered an unparalleled lecturer at the University.

“He was the best lecturer I ever heard,” said Laura Kalman GRD ’82, a history professor at the University of California at Santa Barbara who worked with Blum on her dissertation. “He was not a showman, though he could have been. He knew so much and conveyed it so beautifully and with wit when it was appropriate, and students just loved him.”

Sitting among the large crowds that Blum drew were some of Yale’s most distinguished graduates in the 20th century: former President George W. Bush ’68, Senator John Kerry ’66 and Senator Joseph Lieberman ’64 LAW ’67, in addition to Dean.

Kerry, who took History 35 during his time at Yale, said Blum had a significant impact on his students, reminding them of the real connections between people’s lives and political actions.

“Even decades after I sat in his class, I find myself coming back to one lesson in particular that he shared with us,” Kerry said in a Tuesday email. “It’s something I often bring up with my staff and colleagues: that real change only happens in a democracy when people and voters are responding to their ‘felt needs,’ to use the term he taught us.”

In addition to earning recognition as Yale’s pre-eminent lecturer of the time, Blum was also known for his commitment to mentoring students, both academically and personally. Several of Blum’s former students said he helped them develop their writing abilities, and Kalman said he was a “model on how to live.”

Steve Gillon, a former colleague of Blum’s and now resident historian of the History Channel, said Blum taught him at age 27 that “life begins at 30” — encouraging Gillion to find a passion early and spend his life pursuing it.

Despite his well-known academic career, Blum was a private man, who “was intensely fond of his family, friends, and colleagues,” said Pamela Zink Blum, his wife of 65 years.

Blum’s son, Thomas, said his father’s passion and high expectations for society were also evident in his personal life.

“He set a high standard for his children, though tolerant of our faults, and he set a high standard for himself,” Thomas said.

Blum is survived by his wife, three children and three grandchildren. A memorial service will be held in his honor on Nov. 11 at 2 p.m. in Battell Chapel.

Storied professor dies

John Morton Blum, an eminent Yale historian who taught the likes of former President George W. Bush ’68, U.S. Sen. John Kerry ‘66 and former Yale professor Henry Louis Gates ’73, has passed away in North Branford, CT. He was 90.

Blum, a Harvard man, joined Yale’s History Department in 1957. A former chair of the department, Blum was regarded by many as one of the most distinguished and esteemed historians and craftsman in political history.

“John was a great citizen of Yale, a pioneer in helping us understand the meaning of equality in America, and he embodied what it means to be a historian engaged in the public world,” professor David Blight wrote in an email Monday.

Blum, who published numerous books in the past four decades that covered a wide variety of topics, including the Wilson Era, Progressive Presidents, discord in American politics and society, retired in 1991. Despite his retirement, Blum continued to publish, give interviews and appear in historical documentaries well into his 80s. His teaching left an impression on Bush, as the former president mentioned Blum in a 2001 Class Day speech:

As a student, I tried to keep a low profile. It worked. Last year the New York Times interviewed John Morton Blum because the record showed I had taken one of his courses. Casting his mind’s eye over the parade of young faces down through the years, Professor Blum said, and I quote, “I don’t have the foggiest recollection of him.” [Laughter]

But I remember Professor Blum. And I still recall his dedication and high standards of learning. In my time there were many great professors at Yale, and there still are

Blum is survived by his wife of 65 years, Pamela, and their three children. A memorial service will be held in November, Blight wrote.

%d bloggers like this: