It seems that even in the current period, Romania is rich in cases that provoke fruitful discussions on the topic of academic integrity. The case of the doctorate supported by Minister Lucian Bode could be one such case. But not the only one. This is in the current series with the current Prime Minister and Minister of Energy. In order for the discussion to be effective, perhaps it would be worthwhile to formulate the question even more clearly. This is what I will do next, in a few lines, at the beginning of the example.

Does the percentage decide? University sources told us that 3% is a small percentage and does not lead to a diagnosis of plagiarism. Is it the percentage that decides or the experts who start with simplicity but know how to contextualize? IN Guidance on the integrity of scientific researchpublished in 2020 by CNECSDTI, another view is emerging. The percentage of similarity can be reduced, but if important ideas are paraphrased or if someone translates from a foreign language into Romanian and no longer mentions the author from whom he translated and another, is it plagiarism or not?An expert decides. I think according to the manual mentioned yes, it’s up to the expert. In any case, it is easy to see that only the similarity coefficient remains in public discourse. Turning to experts seems confusing. WHO? Why

And especially how to calculate the percentage of plagiarism? Due to a lack of resources, as we were told, the UBB Council did not consider the entire document. If it is true and what the media say that the percentage of 3% (I would not risk writing 2,…%, because I do not trust the pharmacy in measurements of this kind.) was calculated by reporting a separate part of the work analyzed from entire doctoral dissertation, then we have another problem. From a statistical point of view, it is normal to relate what you learned to what you researched, not to the whole work. What would be the percentage of plagiarism if reporting was done not for the entire thesis but only for the research pages? Obviously, not all 2,.. !

Is it the case of a doctoral degree supported by Minister Bode at UBB that caused a public debate? Of course. Much can be learned from his analysis of public space. The answer can only be affirmative, especially since ministers are dignitaries and should be and have been paragons of morality. Taking into account the available material and human resources and taking into account the context of public interestwouldn’t it be useful for CNECSDTI to report on the topic and case itself? We would also see how it works leadership previously mentioned in a complex case. In fact, the manual is irrelevant because the manual was created in accordance with the law and is based on multiple professional experiences in the field.

I know of cases of doctoral dissertations written in the 70s or 80s that have recently been posted on the website by their authors precisely to prove that the rules of integrity did not appear today and that good teachers were then as well as now , were in university premises. Could not Minister Bode do the same now? In this way, new analyzes favorable to the truth could appear, and the crisis of resources in analysis would be overcome, and commissions or councils empowered on the ground would more easily play their educational role.

I am not suggesting through the questions and suggestions that the risks or practices of plagiarism are unique to high-ranking individuals. However, the case in question concerns, in particular, the category of dignitaries. Otherwise, just visit the CNECSDTI page to find cases of blatant university plagiarism in Arad, Tirgu Jiu, Craiova, etc. Read the whole article and comment on Contributors.ro