Jason Arday, Cambridge Plagiarist, thread two

[Angeruish]

We are nearing our 1000-post limit on the original thread:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/education/5561878-jason-arday-cambridge-plagiarist?reply=153910946

I have now removed the question mark after "plagiarist".

I can't believe the sequel will be as good as the original, but you never know...

This is a very dumb idea since the vast majority of unis are already in terrible financial trouble due to underfunding.

Yeah we are not meant to have more than 6, but you always get exemptions.

Agree he may have been an additional supervisor. I am not a creative writer (putting it mildly!) but have been an additional supervisor on 2 CW PhDs in the past, where the candidate was writing about something to do with my research area.

I think Cambridge needs to step up because it looks as though this entire department is the issue - from Cremin to the anti western education and women’s rights focus of the researcher mentioned above (I forget her name).

At this stage I think the sociology of education department needs a complete excision and everyone being fired/made redundant. Its output is questionable, its hiring protocols unprofessional, its research risible and it is undermining the reputation of the university as a whole. I cannot believe it generates any income even through student fees.

If they are looking to make cuts across the university, this department should be top of the list.

Apparently universities are facing a funding crisis and international students are down. Who would want to shell out all that money and come from China to study the kind of garbage they're offering on these sociology courses?

I think the Chinese students tend to favour STEM courses.

Sorry, I'm not sure what, if anything, you're disagreeing with in my comments.

I think we're on the same page...

It goes wider than that, to the board that appointed him.
They, and their research output, also need a look.

I think there is an ideology that needs looking at and it's certainly not just Cambridge. We have a contemporary idea possibly influenced by the US that we can divide society into the privileged and oppressed with dividing lines on skin colour, country of origin, gender, sexuality etc. I am sure even Jason with all his receipt probably was a true follower of this new religion.

I guess a lot of the department hold the view that oppressed peoples can't enjoy the same education as the privileged as the educational institutional educational offering is rooted in the privilege (white people teaching history about white people, white scientists teaching about the great discoveries of white scientists etc.)

I suppose there will be some in universities determined ideologically to break this status quo to make universities look more 'open' even if you have disastrous collapse in educational standards.

Deceiot

But hasn’t that situation already changed when huge sums were put into black education in London - now London leads the results tables. Sadly only black people seem to be judged as underprivileged - no huge sums went into schools for white working class who have the worst results - it might have been Cameron’s Government or the coalition -can’t remember

You said you hoped it doesn’t affect other black academics - or that’s what I understood but how can it not affect them if Cambridge is taking people with fake phds cos they need to be seen to be inclusive all other black academics are unfortunately to be seen as suspect.
Not just black academics,of course, but those who have drunk the Koolaid and tick every woke box -is that why they were given their role - is that what we want (it might be) or not

I think part of the mistake is that they are trying to fix inequality issues from the top down.

Today's 2 year olds are the 2047 fledgling academics. You can't fix 1987's educational inequality by promoting someone without the academic kudos to the height of academia in 2023. You fix the educational inequality and then get the rewards 20 years later.

Also, it's very easy to say 'disadvantaged black boy'. But you'd have to do a comparative analysis of deprivation factors, residential area, economic status, sex, race, heritage, disability, etc., to come to any meaningful conclusion about why JA was less educated at the age of 20 and whether there was any systemic inequality at play, or if he simply wasn't very academic.

Agree, but I wonder whether (looking at corporate models) at board level they assume/rely on/expect the people below them to have done their job on something like this. My DH is pretty anal when it comes to anything he puts his vote/signature to, but many of his colleagues and the boards above him/his really do just look at him and say ‘you’ve done the due diligence and are happy with this, yes? In that case I trust MrAnony and agree. Where do I sign off?’
I can absolutely see this being the format in academia.

Not saying it’s right, of course, but we’re dealing with human beings, relationships often built over years of working together, and a shedload of trust.

The HR department needs to be completely over this in reasonable expectation that assumptions will be made as to their having double and triple checked every candidate.

ETA replying with a little bias FiL was a chartered fellow of the Inst of personnel management (CIPD?) and both my SiL and Dsis are snr HR peeps and also members. They would expect board members to be relying on their professionalism by the time it reached them.

Speaking for myself as a female who has complex disabilities including autism and is Care Experienced. I do not wish to be offered opportunities due to meeting a tick box or woke ideology.

Unlike JA, I have documented evidence of my experiences within the education, health and care systems. I use lived experience to critique theory and policies while demonstrating my deeper understanding of the theoretical concepts and how they apply to society. I dislike how the actual principles of social justice in education Distribution, Recognition and Pluralism have been corrupted. I believe in equality and equity of opportunity you cannot guarantee the outcome.

An individual either has the underlying ability to achieve, however that may require nurturing and guidance. Put quite simply you have the nature and natural talent on not. I cannot and shall not ever be able to do physics, engineering, drawing, coding, languages etc… I have no skill in thease areas. My skills are critical thinking, analysis of policy and practice discourse.

This whole saga has made a mockery of educational philosophy, sociology and practical application of these principles. It shall set back equality and equity for all disadvantaged within society and cast doubt on the genuine individuals who have challenged their beginnings through the hard work and dedication that is required to overcome adversity.

Which ones aren't woke?
Reading?

Ah, okay.
Someone had said that the people she knew in academia were unlikely to prejudge black academics due to Arday, and I was hoping she was right but suspecting she wasn't.
Sorry if I wasn't clear.

Yes @Lougle this historical perspective has been missing from the discussion. Thank you.

Oxbridge currently recruit BAME undergraduates at a similar rate to their prevalence in the school age population (34%). But the overall BAME % in UK population is only 18%, so obviously the % is less than 34% in the older age groups which wld include those being considered for prof positions.

I don’t know what the % is amongst Cambridge academics, but unless they start firing people, the only way the % changes is through the natural attrition of profs retiring or moving on (& how many academics once they get a position at Cambridge are going to move on before retirement). So the demographic change amongst profs is going to be slow - even if the organisation is doing everything they possibly can (legally) do to promote underrepresented groups.

Oxbridge is very different from other public and private organisations, because a lot of profs don’t want to retire! Even when they have a nice pension: they like what they do, it’s not that onerous (at least physically), they get to take a 4mth sabbatical every 2 years on full pay, and they are (usually) surrounded by bright and interesting people.

It must have been immensely frustrating for the well qualified BAME academics in the field to see Arday promoted to one of these rare positions. (According to Alfua Hirsch’s article in the Guardian, they knew he wasn’t up to it, so it must have been doubly frustrating.)

It would be very interesting to know how Arday’s name got on the short list - or even the long list - who suggested it? In other fields a headhunter helps with shortlisting. Did this happen here (possibly informally)?

Well, while Arday put forward two people to say he was mute, there seems to be many more who say he was not.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/14/jason-ardays-schooldays/

That was me.

I stand by it. I've no idea what people outside academia will think, but I do not think my colleagues would look at a Black academic and think he or she would be like Arday.

I mean, why would they? The fact that Arday cheated says a lot about him. Probably some stuff about Cambridge too! But it absolutely does not follow that other Black people with PhDs would have a greater propensity to cheat.

I spend my life with other professors and literally no one has breathed even a hint of thinking like this.

awful news/rumours being leaked on X and other news sources about Jason. I hope it’s not true.

It is true. It’s on the telegraph. And wikipedias updated its page.

jesus, that’s so horrific.

I understand he has been found dead, what a sad and sorry story, the whole thing.

Shit, that's awful.

Tragedy all round.