Ok, I see your point. However, can you really expect a 12-year-old to play by the same scholarship rules as a scientist? I mean, you really think each science fair project is preceded by months of reading the literature? I think that's silly. You're plagiarism argument hangs on that premise, which is silly.
BTW, you imply that she didn't tweak his study. I don't know what she did with "six fish tanks" but he collected samples from the wild. I assume she raised lionfish in captivity in tanks of different salinity. That's actually quite a tweak. (Of course, she gets no credit because OBVIOUSLY no 12-year-old could come up with such a complex design.) I think that's actually why Dr. Jud is so pissed off; his study is arguably far more informative about this narrow issue.
Again, my main point is that Dr. Zack Jud is clearly a whiny, DOUCHE BAG. I am indeed an angry little elf that he is soo shallow that he goes on FB and complains about this 12-year-old's science fair project eclipsing his brilliance.
And I would argue that stating publicly, as the girl did, that no one had ever thought that lion fish could live in low-salinity water and that this was a breakthrough and scientists were shocked is not only flat out lying, it's basically discrediting the work that scientists have been doing in the field.
And I am not disagreeing with you as I said that quote is particularly problematic, but I don't think it is fair to discredit her entire work as "plagiarism."
Here's how this interview could have gone (not saying it did, but just giving the benefit of the doubt...)
"Scientists were doing plenty of tests on them, but they just always assumed they were in the ocean," Lauren, now 13, tells NPR's Kelly McEvers. "So I was like, 'Well, hey guys, what about the river?' When I spoke to my dad about it, he mentioned his colleague Dr. Zack had been doing some field research on that type of environment and he and I talked about how we could take that into the lab."
See what happened there? Mainstream does not give a rip about that second part b/c...yeah...who cares outside of ecology circles what this guy is doing. Do I think it was incumbent on the Arringtons to set the record straight? Yeah, I think I do but it's hard once that sexy story is out there to get It amended with this non-sexy detail. Absolutely it can be done, but you see how easily the story runs away with itself.
"Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.[1][2] "
12 year old claims idea to study if lionfish could survive in fresh water was hers. Clearly it was not: see published studies. That is plagiarism of an idea. Dude who called it out had every right to do so. Just because it was allegedly a 12 year old that did it (or her parents), doesn't excuse it. I could even go as far as to say he had a duty to protect his ideas, especially if he were working on something that could be copyrighted or patented.
"Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.[1][2] "
12 year old claims idea to study if lionfish could survive in fresh water was hers. Clearly it was not: see published studies. That is plagiarism of an idea. Dude who called it out had every right to do so. Just because it was allegedly a 12 year old that did it (or her parents), doesn't excuse it. I could even go as far as to say he had a duty to protect his ideas, especially if he were working on something that could be copyrighted or patented.
Aha! This is EXACTLY my point. You have no idea how science works. Dr. Jud published his idea. His idea was p-u-b-l-i-s-h-e-d. For years (a couple). He was dying for people to appropriate his idea. But no one did. And then a 12-year-old does a similar study and he gets pissed off because he could really use that kind of exposure.
He's a douche bag and I hope that I've explained to you why Zack Jud is a whiny douche bag.
And just for the record my kid's science fair projects are totally going to involve baking soda and vinegar volcanoes, ok?
I really hate these type of outside of school projects that are really a test of the parents' abilities. Even without this scandal, hearing this story gave me a little eye roll. Given her dad's profession, of course she is going to win prizes and accolades...better access. I mean my kid might have come up with this idea (hahaha...never) and I would be all, dude we are not going to figure out how to find a lionfish, we can buy baking soda and vinegar at Walmart. Think small!
How exactly does correcting the misinformation in a new article make Jud a "douche bag." If there was an article published discrediting my research you can bet I would want to set the record straight.
Because his research elicited no interest from the wider world and then when a 12-year-old did a similar science experiment (that lead to the same conclusion about lionfish and salinity) he whined about it on FB?
"Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.[1][2] "
12 year old claims idea to study if lionfish could survive in fresh water was hers. Clearly it was not: see published studies. That is plagiarism of an idea. Dude who called it out had every right to do so. Just because it was allegedly a 12 year old that did it (or her parents), doesn't excuse it. I could even go as far as to say he had a duty to protect his ideas, especially if he were working on something that could be copyrighted or patented.
Aha! This is EXACTLY my point. You have no idea how science works. Dr. Jud published his idea. His idea was p-u-b-l-i-s-h-e-d. For years (a couple). He was dying for people to appropriate his idea. But no one did. And then a 12-year-old does a similar study and he gets pissed off because he could really use that kind of exposure.
He's a douche bag and I hope that I've explained to you why Zack Jud is a whiny douche bag.
Here's another word to spell: c-i-t-a-t-i-o-n-s. I teach it over and over again to my high school juniors and seniors every year. It's fine (in fact, it's expected) that academic research at all levels will not be wholly original, but will rather build upon the ideas of those who have published in your field of study before you ever thought to study it. Plagiarism and academic dishonesty come into play when you fail to give credit to those earlier authors and researchers. There's a very clear line here, and you're unsuccessfully trying to kick sand over it.
I like how some know it alls seem to think they have the inside scoop on who is in science and who is not. News flash, bucko, the internet is not full of uneducated yokels. There are a frightening number of scientists, lawyers, and medical professionals here. You can take your "you don't know about this because I am smugly superior" attitude and let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
"Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "stealing and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions" and the representation of them as one's own original work.[1][2] "
12 year old claims idea to study if lionfish could survive in fresh water was hers. Clearly it was not: see published studies. That is plagiarism of an idea. Dude who called it out had every right to do so. Just because it was allegedly a 12 year old that did it (or her parents), doesn't excuse it. I could even go as far as to say he had a duty to protect his ideas, especially if he were working on something that could be copyrighted or patented.
Aha! This is EXACTLY my point. You have no idea how science works. Dr. Jud published his idea. His idea was p-u-b-l-i-s-h-e-d. For years (a couple). He was dying for people to appropriate his idea. But no one did. And then a 12-year-old does a similar study and he gets pissed off because he could really use that kind of exposure.
He's a douche bag and I hope that I've explained to you why Zack Jud is a whiny douche bag.
There are plenty of people here who understand how academia and the publishing world works.
I think there are even several of us who know what would happen if it leaked that you are being a whiny mcbitchface on the internet while calling your other colleague a douchebag would look. I seriously suggest that you put down whatever you are drinking and go to bed. You've already fairly well cemented that you are this little girl's dad. If Jud is googling to see what is being said on the internet, he could find this post. And my, wouldn't that be awkward for you?
Aha! This is EXACTLY my point. You have no idea how science works. Dr. Jud published his idea. His idea was p-u-b-l-i-s-h-e-d. For years (a couple). He was dying for people to appropriate his idea. But no one did. And then a 12-year-old does a similar study and he gets pissed off because he could really use that kind of exposure.
He's a douche bag and I hope that I've explained to you why Zack Jud is a whiny douche bag.
Here's another word to spell: c-i-t-a-t-i-o-n-s. I teach it over and over again to my high school juniors and seniors every year. It's fine (in fact, it's expected) that academic research at all levels will not be wholly original, but will rather build upon the ideas of those who have published in your field of study before you ever thought to study it. Plagiarism and academic dishonesty come into play when you fail to give credit to those earlier authors and researchers. There's a very clear line here, and you're unsuccessfully trying to kick sand over it.
Agreed. A professional scientist would not be a scholar if she didn't cite prior work. I assert that is a ridiculous standard to apply to a 12-year-old's science fair project. No one has disagreed yet although that's fine if you do. (I don't mind if you're wrong).
Post by decemberwedding07 on Jul 28, 2014 23:11:50 GMT -5
So, if what the dad had the daughter do was so not a big deal, then why didn't the dad just have the daughter knock off his own research that hadn't gotten a lot if traction? Surely he had his own research topic that nobody was really talking about? I mean, he wouldn't have minded if his daughter took credit for all that work, right? The topic getting attention is all that matters, right?
But what do you expect him to do? He should have said to NPR: "No, don't interview my daughter. You should interview Dr. Zack Jud because he's the real brains behind this."?
I expect him to pull out the ol' APA, Chicago, MLA, or whatever style guide is relevant, and teach his daughter how to properly cite and credit ideas that are not her own before the project even gets turned in.
I expect him to, if the child is doing the research for the project, to help guide her in doing research correctly, so that she likely would have found Jud's findings in the first place.
If he had done that, he wouldn't have had to say anything to NPR, because this wouldn't be an issue. The end.
Here's another word to spell: c-i-t-a-t-i-o-n-s. I teach it over and over again to my high school juniors and seniors every year. It's fine (in fact, it's expected) that academic research at all levels will not be wholly original, but will rather build upon the ideas of those who have published in your field of study before you ever thought to study it. Plagiarism and academic dishonesty come into play when you fail to give credit to those earlier authors and researchers. There's a very clear line here, and you're unsuccessfully trying to kick sand over it.
Agreed. A professional scientist would not be a scholar if she didn't cite prior work. I assert that is a ridiculous standard to apply to a 12-year-old's science fair project. No one has disagreed yet although that's fine if you do. (I don't mind if you're wrong).
No, it isn't a ridiculous standard at all. I've nailed kids only a few years her senior to the wall for less, and they weren't making the national media rounds with their Macbeth papers.
And I am not disagreeing with you as I said that quote is particularly problematic, but I don't think it is fair to discredit her entire work as "plagiarism."
Here's how this interview could have gone (not saying it did, but just giving the benefit of the doubt...)
"Scientists were doing plenty of tests on them, but they just always assumed they were in the ocean," Lauren, now 13, tells NPR's Kelly McEvers. "So I was like, 'Well, hey guys, what about the river?' When I spoke to my dad about it, he mentioned his colleague Dr. Zack had been doing some field research on that type of environment and he and I talked about how we could take that into the lab."
See what happened there? Mainstream does not give a rip about that second part b/c...yeah...who cares outside of ecology circles what this guy is doing. Do I think it was incumbent on the Arringtons to set the record straight? Yeah, I think I do but it's hard once that sexy story is out there to get It amended with this non-sexy detail. Absolutely it can be done, but you see how easily the story runs away with itself. "Scientists were doing plenty of tests on them, but they just always assumed they were in the ocean,"
Well, even with potential context, this statement is false. "Scientists were doing plenty of tests on them, but they just always assumed they were in the ocean."
How exactly does correcting the misinformation in a new article make Jud a "douche bag." If there was an article published discrediting my research you can bet I would want to set the record straight.
Just for the record (not that anyone cares at this point), I am not on the side of calling him a "douche bag" for trying to set the record straight. Not at all. I think the Arringtons could have used Facebook or similar tools to give some credit where credit is due. I am just "arguing" how the media can easily warp something and that their interviews weren't necessarily one big intentional lie. Again, he could/should have done more to promote this guy's work, but that doesn't mean the intent was there that I think some people are assigning to the dad (though it could be...just playing devil's advocate).
Agreed. A professional scientist would not be a scholar if she didn't cite prior work. I assert that is a ridiculous standard to apply to a 12-year-old's science fair project. No one has disagreed yet although that's fine if you do. (I don't mind if you're wrong).
I remember learning to cite sources in 3rd or 4th grade. In fact it appears to be a standard approach. 12 is older than that and should already know better. More importantly dad, the academic, should know better.