HEC official maintains innocence as more copied papers found
Rejects findings of globally used computer software
Representational Image. PHOTO: REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:
Higher Education Commission (HEC) Executive Director Dr Arshad Ali has apparently refused to accept the findings of the software that detects plagiarism, as more than 20 additional research papers have allegedly been found out to be copied.
Sources privy to the development say that the executive director has apparently refused to accept the findings of Turnitin, the software used by the commission to track plagiarism.
In December 2017, it was reported that a research paper by Ali had been plagiarised which was later confirmed by the HEC’s internal committee inquiry. Yet, HEC Chairperson Mukhtar Ahmed formed another panel comprising nine vice chancellors of different universities to come up with a clear finding.
The second committee was only formed after the executive director refused to accept the initial results. The move has, however, been termed ‘preferential treatment’ for someone who is serving in the commission.
“In other cases, universities are given a simple timeframe to reply or take action in a given time against plagiarists but here it’s been taken as a special case,” said an HEC official.
Guardian of plagiarism red-faced in its own backyard
On March 2018, the second committee held a meeting and picked three random research papers submitted by Ali while also giving him till April 2 for responding to the charges against him.
The HEC chairperson has been saying since the day one that Ali would face the same fate as others who committed the same crime.
Interestingly, when contacted, Ali did not return calls or answer messages, even though he had earlier shared a detailed stance over allegations of plagiarism against him.
“This is the paper that was once submitted to an organisation, but it was then withdrawn for some shortcomings from reviewers,” he said, adding, “After removing those flaws the research paper was submitted to another organisation but mistakenly it was not withdrawn from the earlier place, hence making it a case of self-plagiarism.”
He also stated that nowhere in the world such act was considered plagiarism. “I have given them the evidence,” he said but could not explain why the committee had rejected his stance.
According to sources, the executive director and the chairperson have had exchange of heated arguments on two occasions and are not on talking terms with each other. The chairperson wants the case resolved at the earliest to avert any untoward situation as selection of his successor begins soon.
Higher Education Commission (HEC) Executive Director Dr Arshad Ali has apparently refused to accept the findings of the software that detects plagiarism, as more than 20 additional research papers have allegedly been found out to be copied.
Sources privy to the development say that the executive director has apparently refused to accept the findings of Turnitin, the software used by the commission to track plagiarism.
In December 2017, it was reported that a research paper by Ali had been plagiarised which was later confirmed by the HEC’s internal committee inquiry. Yet, HEC Chairperson Mukhtar Ahmed formed another panel comprising nine vice chancellors of different universities to come up with a clear finding.
The second committee was only formed after the executive director refused to accept the initial results. The move has, however, been termed ‘preferential treatment’ for someone who is serving in the commission.
“In other cases, universities are given a simple timeframe to reply or take action in a given time against plagiarists but here it’s been taken as a special case,” said an HEC official.
Guardian of plagiarism red-faced in its own backyard
On March 2018, the second committee held a meeting and picked three random research papers submitted by Ali while also giving him till April 2 for responding to the charges against him.
The HEC chairperson has been saying since the day one that Ali would face the same fate as others who committed the same crime.
Interestingly, when contacted, Ali did not return calls or answer messages, even though he had earlier shared a detailed stance over allegations of plagiarism against him.
“This is the paper that was once submitted to an organisation, but it was then withdrawn for some shortcomings from reviewers,” he said, adding, “After removing those flaws the research paper was submitted to another organisation but mistakenly it was not withdrawn from the earlier place, hence making it a case of self-plagiarism.”
He also stated that nowhere in the world such act was considered plagiarism. “I have given them the evidence,” he said but could not explain why the committee had rejected his stance.
According to sources, the executive director and the chairperson have had exchange of heated arguments on two occasions and are not on talking terms with each other. The chairperson wants the case resolved at the earliest to avert any untoward situation as selection of his successor begins soon.