Academic dishonesty, as the SRC’s Education Department reminds us each and every year, covers a multitude of sins, including fabricating data, misrepresenting results, “recycling” past assessments, and simply copying someone else’s work without giving them the credit.
Ironically, nobody seems to have told the SRC Education Officers, Eleanor Morley and Ridah Hassan. Of the articles in this year’s CounterCourse, at least seven— Ancient History, Political Economy, Geosciences, Vet Science, and parts of Sociology, Biology, and SCA— are not their best work. By that, of course, I mean that they’re not *their* work at all, but rather the work of myself and contributors to the previous year’s CounterCourse. Not only have large chunks of those articles simply been copy-pasted from last year’s edition, including references to courses that no longer exist and teachers that have since moved on, but the contributors who *actually* wrote these articles haven’t been asked their permission or given any of the credit, not even in a Thank You page that finds the time to pay tribute to Lenin. Poor form, comrades.
But if the SRC Education Officers *haven’t* been spending their vast publications budget and their $10,000 annual stipend researching and publicising honest course reviews, what exactly have students been paying them for? Apparently for using this year’s CounterCourse to advertise their “organisation”, Socialist Alternative, with constant references to its members (all four of them) and an Education report including a paragraph-long ad for their conference, unimaginatively titled “Marxism”.
Now, far be it from me to prevent anyone from promoting their own little sect— dedicated readers will know I’d give my left kidney or my student political career for that kind of advertising reach, and since Socialist Alternative’s entire membership can comfortably fit into a Volkswagen, they probably need all the help they can get. On the other hand, I’d much rather the Education Officers’ promotion of their ultra-left cult not come at the expense of accurate and up-to-date course reviews, particularly when students pay each of them $10,000 for the latter. At the very least, please give me a shout-out before you steal my work in future.
Faithfully as ever,
Harry Stratton, Arts/Science III
Young Labor Left