In response to alleged plagiarism in Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Taoyuan City Councilor Ling Tao’s (凌濤) master’s thesis, the academic ethics committee of National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University (NYCU) said that Ling had completed the procedure of adding annotations and replacing the submitted thesis.
Could a thesis that involves plagiarism get away scot-free by adding sources and replacing a thesis that had already been submitted? No, it should not work like that. Such a statement by the NYCU academic ethics committee is shocking and leads people to doubt the academic standards of the school.
Are NYCU academics attempting a cover-up, or do they not even know what a thesis is? A thesis is a publication of research results, not just a collection of words or articles. It is the outcome of the careful selection of a meaningful topic, research using scientific methods and a thorough presentation of the final conclusions.
Topic selection and research methods should follow rigorous logical procedures, and their conclusions should be innovative or contribute to their academic field. Theses that do not meet these criteria should not be able to pass and a diploma should not be issued. Was this not the standard procedure when the professors on the NYCU academic ethics committee wrote their own theses and dissertations?
Ling’s thesis was heavily plagiarized, and some parts were a full-page copy of someone else’s work with only a few words changed, said NYCU professor Chen Shi-fen (陳時奮), the whistle-blower.
If so, could this thesis really be innovative? A thesis needs to follow specific logical procedures for topic selection and research methods.
How could a thesis that you have worked hard on be highly similar to other people’s published papers? If it is highly similar to other work, how could it be innovative? Once the content of a thesis is so like someone else’s, how could it be okay to just indicate the source and resubmit?
Ling’s thesis is a small matter, but the standards of NYCU’s ethics committee are a big deal. If the academics on the ethics committee allow a thesis with high similarity to another and a large amount of plagiarism to pass the review and award the student a degree, does this mean that this was also the procedure when they wrote their theses and conducted research?
Maybe this is the way all academics at NYCU do research and write papers?
If that is the case, should the NYCU, the Ministry of Education or even the research sponsors not come forward and demand an explanation?
A thesis is not a pile of scrap paper. It has a specific academic status, should be contributive academically or socially, and should not be treated so carelessly.
If the ethics committee at NYCU decides things in such a hasty manner, does NYCU really have nothing to say in response? Could the Ministry of Education turn a blind eye to this? Would academia sit by and watch helplessly as academics decline and integrity falls into disrepute?
Mike Chang is an accountant.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
This month, the National Health Insurance (NHI) is to implement a major policy change by eliminating the suspension-and-resumption mechanism for Taiwanese residing abroad. With more than 210,000 Taiwanese living overseas — many with greater financial means than those in Taiwan — this reform, catalyzed by a 2022 Constitutional Court ruling, underscores the importance of fairness, sustainability and shared responsibility in one of the world’s most admired public healthcare systems. Beyond legal obligations, expatriates have a compelling moral duty to contribute, recognizing their stake in a system that embodies the principle of health as a human right. The ruling declared the prior
US president-elect Donald Trump is inheriting from President Joe Biden a challenging situation for American policy in the Indo-Pacific region, with an expansionist China on the march and threatening to incorporate Taiwan, by force if necessary. US policy choices have become increasingly difficult, in part because Biden’s policy of engagement with China, including investing in personal diplomacy with President Xi Jinping (習近平), has not only yielded little but also allowed the Chinese military to gain a stronger footing in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. In Xi’s Nov. 16 Lima meeting with a diminished Biden, the Chinese strongman signaled little
On Tuesday, the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) issued a statement criticizing Song Siyao (宋思瑤), a student from Shanghai’s Fudan University, saying she had offended the sensibilities of Taiwanese. It also called for the Ma Ying-jeou Foundation — established by former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — which had organized the tour group, to remind group members to be careful with their statements. Song, during a visit to a baseball stadium in Taichung, said that the tour group “would like to congratulate China, Taipei team (中國台北隊) ... we wish mainland China and Taiwan compatriots can be like the team Chinatrust Brothers and
“Integrated Diplomacy” (總和外交) is the guiding principle of Taiwan’s current foreign policy. It seeks to mobilize technology, capital and talent for global outreach, strengthening Taiwan’s international connections. However, without a robust information security mechanism, such efforts risk being reduced to superficial courtesy calls. Security clearance serves as the “entrance examination results” for government agency personnel in sensitive positions, qualifying them to access sensitive information. Senior aides in the US Congress must also possess security clearance to assist lawmakers in handling classified budgets. However, security clearance is not an automatic right or a blanket necessity for accessing sensitive information. Access is granted only
RSS