The Harvard Crimson recently published an open-and-shut case of Professor Ogletree committing yet more plagiarism in the 2004 book which was apparently ghostwritten for him (at least in part) by students. Four sentences were lifted, with only minor wording changes, from a 1996 book by University of California professor Roy Brooks. Story here. New York Times followup story here.
Not entirely coincidentally, shortly after the Crimson story appeared, a website sprung up fully documenting all the details, including copies of the relevant pages of each book. It's authored by one "R.O. Denver." Here. Given the website, we see no need to offer our independent discussion.
Disclosure: "R.O. Denver" is a pseudonym for a law professor with whom we've corresponded in the past year, and we knew about the tip to the Crimson in advance (indeed, we suggested that Denver contact either the Boston Globe or the Crimson, given their past interest in Harvard plagiarism stories). For professional reasons the professor must remain anonymous, but the professor has authorized us to state that he or she teaches at a law school somewhere east of the Mississippi and is generally viewed as a political "conservative" (at least by heavily liberal law faculty standards), though that orientation had no role in the professor's decision to provide the tip (according to the professor).
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Thursday, September 28, 2006
New Harvard Crimson Story
Yesterday's Harvard Crimson has an informative reprise of the Harvard plagiarism/ghostwriting stories. Here.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Dean Velvel on Dean Kagan
Recently Dean Velvel posted some comments (in the context of e-mails with Harvard professor Howard Gardner) on Harvard president Lawrence Summers leaving -- and on the prospect that Dean Elena Kagan might take his place! Here.
Friday, February 03, 2006
Confirmation That Tribe's Assistants Wrote "Large Tracts" of His Treatise
Last week Dean Velvel had a long post, of excellent quality as usual, discussing the problem of ghostwriting and addressing yet again the Tribe/Kagan affair as it relates to the "ghost in the room." You can read it here.
Of particular interest is Velvel's report that he's starting to think we may well be correct in our assertions (in part based on constant talk at the law school) that for years Tribe has been running a ghostwriting operation in which his students or former students draft most of his books and articles:
"I spoke with a professor who told me, fortuitously, that Tribe had asked him to work on American Constitutional Law when he was a student at Harvard Law School, and he knew several people who had done so. (Working for Tribe was, he said, as one would think, a plum job that would lead to recommendations for prestigious judicial clerkships, that would lead to other prestigious jobs, etc.) The people who had worked for Tribe, said this professor, had written large tracts of Tribe’s treatise."
Also, Dean Velvel discusses in the most detail ever the reasons for thinking that Dean Elena Kagan had a conflict of interest when she decided to involve herself in the investigation of the ghostwriting and plagiarism charges against Professor Tribe in connection with his 1985 book God Save This Honorable Court. The gist of it:
So . . . . it begins to look, does it not, as if the Dean of Harvard Law School, one of the two persons (President Summers being the other) who should have but apparently did not punish Tribe, was one of the participants in what some people think was "in effect a ghostwriting mill" that Tribe ran to prepare the treatise which is one of the main components of his fame. If all this is so, there was no way in hell, was there, that Kagan could have punished him for having had one or more persons ghostwrite (very large?) portions of his book on confirmation of Justices? (It is claimed by some that the book was in effect written for him by a student, and now Democrat politician, named Ron Klain.) I mean, if all this stuff about Tribe running a ghostwriting mill is true, then Kagan was a participant in the ghostwriting machine by which Tribe wrote his treatise (and for all I know may have gotten various jobs partly because of his recommendation(s)). How could a participant in his ghostwriting mill punish him for it?
Oh yes, one could say that Kagan was in a different position than Tribe back in the ’80s. She was a student. She was no doubt eager to win Tribe’s plaudits and approval and get recognition and recommendations from him and to get prominently published thanks from him in his book. One might almost sympathize with her if one didn’t suspect for various reasons that she likely is one of those east coast types, one of those Harvard/Yale types, like the Clintons, for whom she worked, who would run over their grandmothers to get ahead. Regardless, however, how could Kagan punish Tribe for conduct she had participated in? ’Tain’t likely, Jeb.
Of particular interest is Velvel's report that he's starting to think we may well be correct in our assertions (in part based on constant talk at the law school) that for years Tribe has been running a ghostwriting operation in which his students or former students draft most of his books and articles:
"I spoke with a professor who told me, fortuitously, that Tribe had asked him to work on American Constitutional Law when he was a student at Harvard Law School, and he knew several people who had done so. (Working for Tribe was, he said, as one would think, a plum job that would lead to recommendations for prestigious judicial clerkships, that would lead to other prestigious jobs, etc.) The people who had worked for Tribe, said this professor, had written large tracts of Tribe’s treatise."
Also, Dean Velvel discusses in the most detail ever the reasons for thinking that Dean Elena Kagan had a conflict of interest when she decided to involve herself in the investigation of the ghostwriting and plagiarism charges against Professor Tribe in connection with his 1985 book God Save This Honorable Court. The gist of it:
So . . . . it begins to look, does it not, as if the Dean of Harvard Law School, one of the two persons (President Summers being the other) who should have but apparently did not punish Tribe, was one of the participants in what some people think was "in effect a ghostwriting mill" that Tribe ran to prepare the treatise which is one of the main components of his fame. If all this is so, there was no way in hell, was there, that Kagan could have punished him for having had one or more persons ghostwrite (very large?) portions of his book on confirmation of Justices? (It is claimed by some that the book was in effect written for him by a student, and now Democrat politician, named Ron Klain.) I mean, if all this stuff about Tribe running a ghostwriting mill is true, then Kagan was a participant in the ghostwriting machine by which Tribe wrote his treatise (and for all I know may have gotten various jobs partly because of his recommendation(s)). How could a participant in his ghostwriting mill punish him for it?
Oh yes, one could say that Kagan was in a different position than Tribe back in the ’80s. She was a student. She was no doubt eager to win Tribe’s plaudits and approval and get recognition and recommendations from him and to get prominently published thanks from him in his book. One might almost sympathize with her if one didn’t suspect for various reasons that she likely is one of those east coast types, one of those Harvard/Yale types, like the Clintons, for whom she worked, who would run over their grandmothers to get ahead. Regardless, however, how could Kagan punish Tribe for conduct she had participated in? ’Tain’t likely, Jeb.