Our friends at the Good Law Project

Why, yes. Mahatma Gandhi just signed.

😆

A good friend of mine is a maths professor. He has taught a couple of autistic students who have needed PAs to manage university / living away from home - funded through DSA and PIP. They have been exceptionally bright and an asset to the course. I think it’s brilliant that this support enables them to participate.

I don't think the omnicause is a very good way to think about it. I understand why it was coined, to express a certain real tenancy amongst some on the left re "correct thinking" but I actually think there is way more variation across several of the issues listed than you would think. Eg you have Boy George, bread tubers like Contrapoints etc who were very very vocal and aggressive in their support of trans rights and their criticism of the likes of JKR. A year or so later and they were very aggressively pro-Israel/anti-Palestine/anti-Hamas (however you want to define it). Even though both pro-trans and pro-palestine positions are supposed to be "omni-cause" positions. There are also more moderate types who support transrights and Israel in a less obviously crazy way (David Packman, quite a lot of left wing celebrities) And for balance there are lots of pro-trans rights types who take the opposite position on Israel/Palestine to them.

I just think, whatever your views on those issues are (really don't want to go into Israel/Palestine debates) the idea of an ombicause doesn't really hold up any more. I could use examples from the other stuff you lost as well. You have to cherry pick a lot to make it seem like there is and then it stops being an accurate representation of reality. I do agree the "you support this so you must support that" is a thing. I just think it's become such a cliche now it obscures rather than reveals.

ETA: sorry, I meant to put in the first paragraph that this is very true of racism as well. There are quite a few TRA types who are openly quite racist, and quite a few anti-racist traditional left wing types who either avoid the trans issue entirely or a re quite clearly done with it. I don't think the two causes always go together.

Is that ridiculous petition still up for people to troll/beclown themselves?

I signed twice! Once after they'd posted JA's resignation letter!

I'm wondering if they knew, and that was part of his attraction. Another opportunity to 'Queer' academia, like Biggus Tittus at Oxford.
Except that this time they have callously used a person with questionable mental health in order to push their pathetic post-modern agenda.

Love it! 😂

Cambridge profs are quietly removing their names GLP petition. Meanwhile, the petition continues to gain ground. 😂

Mad, isn’t it? We did have to update all our medical evidence and when DD went to uni, they needed to see it too. I really think that there has to be a hardline - no clinical diagnosis and extended report (which states which supports are needed, if any), no assistance. I actually think they would find that there is less need, but also, the students who HAVE made it that far, ie sat exams, really shouldn’t need quite as many accommodations.

The only one my DD actually needs is for tutors to agree that she can have additional tutor contact time [the odd 10 min zoom by appointment, or just replies to the extra emails she might send clarifying assignment criteria and automatic extensions/rescheduling of assignments that are due on the same day]. I think that if you need very much more than this, then there is a question over your suitability to be there and it means you are not being prepared for the world of work.

For my DS, he needs to know he can approach his tutors for that contact time/safe space to ensure he has understood what is required and an ND/academic or even peer mentor for the first few terms to ensure that he is juggling the demands of the course with self-care as mummy won’t be there to yell at him to have a shower and clean his room.

I'm very intrigued by what this reveals about the credulity and naiviety of the people making appointments. We really need to be looking at that, surely? If they didn't look askance at JA's erm... more startling descriptions of his life, how many other instances of duplicity have they missed from those who were a teeny weeny bit more careful with their untruths?

This discussion is about a so called professor, who has plagiarised his way to a top position at one of our foremost seats of learning.

I think Arday is almost the least interesting part of this, liars and conmen are ten-a-penny. Arguably he's taken what ability he had and parlayed it into quite an achievement. If he was at all prone to apparently well deserved imposter syndrome his stomach should have been 90% ulcer.

I think the interesting bit is the apparently intelligent people and organisations who facilitated him and even now will not admit to their failure.

I believe it's a recognised thing that some people will not admit they've been conned. Show them incontrovertible proof, they ignore it, excuse it or attack the person with the proof. We see it all the time with gender ideology.

Those whom the gods wish to destroy first get the support of the GLP, and then Zack Polanski as the 'tin lid' ..

You'd have to be very naive or very blinkered to deny that there are people who are taking pleasure in a prominent Black person 'getting his comeuppance' so publicly. It happens. Race is invoked when it should be irrelevant.

I've already mentioned the avalanche of racist abuse directed at Bukayo Saka when he missed a crucial penalty for England - not that he was shit at taking penalties, but that he was Black and by extension shit at everything including taking penalties. Or wearing the England shirt. Or anything.

Two things can be true at the same time: there is undoubtedly some racist gloating [not here, of course, but in society in general] about the public take-down of JA, but there is also all that evidence that he lied and plagiarised.

Both are wrong. Neither justifies the other.
He is a fantasist and a plagiarist and he is Black. Not 'because he is Black' or 'but he is Black'. Just and.

Unfortunately 'The bigger they come, the harder they fall' - JA claimed to be some kind of superman, and he courted publicity and attention for all sorts of heroic feats.
He and his supporters can't complain now that the publicity has turned negative.

I work across 3 universities as a PhD examiner and secondary supervisor. 2 of them refer to autism as an identity and are open in their objection to ‘pathologising difference’.

I think that provision of thinking frames and thinking scaffolds to support individuals to organise their thoughts and writing is great. I am all for these sorts of additional supports and adjustments.

Over the years, I have marked theses and looked forward to vivas based on what I have read, only to be sorely disappointed to the point of doubting they should pass. Conversely, I have struggled to make any kind of sense of a thesis only to be blown away by the student at viva.

@Brainworm she’s right in that our disability guidelines say for students with a registered disability, ignore spag and look for the underlying arguments. We still, to my knowledge, require proof of diagnosis. Is that not required at yours?

I don’t have a problem with ignoring spag and looking for the underlying argument myself though it can be time consuming. I’ve had exceptionally bright students with dyspraxia and it’s been a pleasure helping them to learn to organise their writing and make their original arguments clear to their readers. That’s much more satisfying than my students who are exceptionally good at regurgitating others ideas but have none of their own.

The issue is universities littered with students with poor levels of critical thinking and intellectual rigour who believe that they are entitled to pass assignments because failing them is discriminatory. This might well characterise some students (I don’t see this myself), but to me, the much much bigger issue is the commodification of HE and the rush for numbers. Of course we have students who are less motivated, less dedicated, less prepared to put in the work.

Anyhow, with the HE embrace of GenAI, we’ll see much less critical thinking in our students.

Having said that, lots of universities are now struggling to fund support due to the increasing number of people seeking support and adopting policies of not requiring proof of diagnosis due to waiting lists and ‘a medical model pathologising difference’.

At the risk of people getting upset about this perk - my DD and friend’s dyslexic were both unequipped with a subsidised laptop via the DSA and thousands of pounds worth of software to help her studies - dictation programmes, software to convert any text into an audio file so they can listen to their textbooks, software to summarise those texts and help identify the relevant chapters for assignments, software to SPAG/sense-check etc. DD doesn’t use much of it because she likes the physicality of books and processes the info better by manually written notes that she can then type in etc - but the resources are all there to ensure that students with these disabilities can produce assignments and reports of the same finished quality as those without.

Why didn't you stay away then, are you like a moth drawn to the flame? This discussion is about a so called professor, who has plagiarised his way to a top position at one of our foremost seats of learning.

Kathleen Stock makes her position clear in the most recent Unherd podcast.

She points out that academia is elitist by design and not intended to be inclusive. She talks about the expectation on academics to overlook shortcomings in assignments to the extent of awarding marks as if a coherent argument is made , based on what you think the student would say if they didn’t have difficulties structuring their thoughts. This is absurd when an assignment intends to assess quality of thought.

There is no way academics would have a problem with those who have great academic ability but need extra time to read a paper, or software to correct SPAG. The issue is universities littered with students with poor levels of critical thinking and intellectual rigour who believe that they are entitled to pass assignments because failing them is discriminatory.

Culturally, we are in a place where inclusion is valued above merit by many.

I think Stock points out that what is deemed a ‘reasonable adjustment’ by many is very unreasonable when it comes to the endeavour of academic rigour.

If Arday is wondering what to do now they're casting James Bond for the end of the year.

If he wrote a truthful autobiography I'm sure it would be a fascinating. A PHd about the Fox Mulders who wanted to, were desperate to, believe would also be a useful, possibly original study and a way for him to salvage something useful and even face saving. Like an anthropologist who lives with a foreign, exotic culture.

I think all people have rights to live as they wish

That's not a right anybody has, as everybody's life is constrained by the law and by other people's rights: We only have a right to live our life within the limits of the law - including trans people.

When pressed by the Guardian on why he presented such claims to the world, Arday offered a telling response: ‘To be honest with you, I thought you’d just believe me.’

That's self-ID in a nutshell.

Maybe that’s what she meant to write @TempestTost but that’s not what she wrote. I admire Prof Stock, am grateful for her work in supporting women’s rights to say no to men and she has a point about some ‘midwittery’ faculty promoted or protected (due to DEI?). You’re asking us to read between the lines in the piece that she wrote to see a connection between accommodating faculty with dyslexia and universities misunderstanding access, equity and their role in knowledge generation. I see these as quite different scenarios.

Maybe we’re arguing semantics but, again, words matter. Really, my objection is to the specific use of the term ‘intellectual disability’ in reference to anyone with dyslexia or who is autistic. It generally refers to someone who is less intelligent or has an impairment in intellectual functioning. Obviously not the same as being dyslexic or autistic or making reasonable adjustments accordingly.

Personally, I have not seen any faculty with an ‘intellectual disability’ given accommodations in my university to the point that they can’t meet the required standards of intellectual functioning. Certainly at a professorial level. Does someone like Butler meet that definition? I think she writes rubbish, but wouldn’t say she’s not intelligent. I have seen faculty promoted beyond their abilities, many times. But not because of accommodating an intellectual disability or because of accommodating someone who’s dyslexic. Instead, because of university politics. Quite often boys club politics.

Meanwhile, over at the Guardian...

The takedown of Jason Arday has overjoyed the right, and must be a wake-up call for the left

There's a line in the article in which the author, Jason Okundaye, states that:

"The mass investigation into Arday’s PhD may be presented as the pursuit of public and intellectual integrity, and yet the origin of this is grievance politics from those who feel diversity has blocked their own advancement."

And yet he misses that this is exactly what Jason Arday has done. He was less qualified for the role than anyone with a non-plagiarised PhD, and arguably less qualified than anyone with a non-plagiarised BA. His various appointments were over a huge number of people infinitely more competent than he was, and it is not grievance politics to see that other people were just not given the same opportunities as Arday, because they lacked the right diversity qualities.

Has he actually resigned, or is he just pretending about that as well?

I had a depressing revelation about Jason Arday today. There are all kinds of people coming out and defending him like Zack Polanski, making claims like black academics are held to higher standards than their white equivalents, or that questions of plagiarism are just allegations, and that there's no evidence of wrongdoing. Now, if you have seen the text comparisons, the plagiarism is absolutely and unambiguously clear. It was proven before doubt even before the GLP got involved. And, if so, if it is so obvious, why is there any doubt?

My suspicion is that it isn't obvious to a lot of people weighing in on the issue, because they think that this is how you write essays. The idea is that you copy out bits of other people's work, stick in references, and that's it. So, where people don't see plagiarism, and think Arday is being unfairly treated, it's because they either would or have behaved in exactly the same way.

There are many examples of white liars getting unmasked and mocked. Its is not the skin colour, it is the lying, that is being criticised.
Even in white culture there are fictional characters who lie. Walter Mitty as fantasist who lives in a fantasy world in his own head. Baron Munchausen known for his impossibly tall stories. A rather appropriate for the context of this forum metal condition is even named after him, Munchausen's Syndrome By Proxy.
There's a difference between telling an obvious tall story to entertain when everyone knows its not true, they are just enjoying the story, and outright lying to try and deceive another person for personal gain e.g. social standing.
I think this professor is a fantasist, a daydreamer dreaming of greater things, a Walter Mitty, a hero in his own head. The problem is that people in power have encouraged and rewarded the tall tales. The feedback given to a fantasist was "we believe you, great work, keep it up" and so he has. His fantasy became real through the encouragement of others.
His fantasy world has nothing to do with his skin colour. People encouraging him to live this fantasy world as real life is all about his skin colour. Those people encouraging his fantasy world are hurting him not helping him. The amount of national scrutiny he is under because of the "be kind" brigade is huge. I do feel for the poor fellow. It's also a huge example of the soft bigotry of low expectations. I find it very distasteful and virtue signally racist.