PhD Student Found Guilty of Plagiarism After 3-Year Battle

In South Africa, a PhD candidate at the University of Johannesburg has been found guilty of plagiarism in his doctoral thesis. The school suspended the student, Norman Shoko, for three years in a case that has dragged on for nearly four years.

The news comes from reporting by Sipho Mabena at the City Press. However, the case is unique because it dragged on for over three years.

The case began in September 2021, when Shoko was first accused of plagiarizing his thesis. He denied the allegations and submitted 23 grounds for an appeal. However, according to MJ van As, the disciplinary committee chairperson, he chose not to testify at the inquiry.

Shoko then hired an attorney, who petitioned the university’s manager for student ethics and judicial services to take the case. The attorney cited several alleged issues with the original disciplinary process.

However, the school has resolved the petition. The original ruling stands, and Shoko faces a three-year suspension. Barring a lawsuit, this decision ends this case, which has taken nearly four years to resolve.

But why did this case take so long?

Background of the Case

According to the article, Shoko is a theology student at the school. The PhD was to be his latest degree at the school, having previously earned his bachelor’s and master’s degrees (or equivalents) there.

By early 2021, he was working on his PhD thesis. He submitted the work in progress to the University of Pretoria, where he resides, to inquire about post-doctoral opportunities. However, problems did not arise until September 2021.

Then, he submitted the paper to the school’s Turnitin system. Turnitin found that roughly 45% of the paper was plagiarized from other sources. Shortly after that, the school charged Shoko with plagiarism and academic dishonesty.

Considering the evidence, the school did not grant Shoko a chance to appeal the finding, only the sanction. He submitted 23 grounds for appeal but did not testify before the inquiry. As such, the school dismissed his allegations as “bald and unsubstantiated.” They further noted that Shoko copied significant parts of his thesis from sources he did not cite.

Shoko then worked with his lawyer to petition the school to reconsider the decision. He made multiple allegations, including an alleged conflict of interest regarding Van As and an overly harsh punishment.

Shoko said he was willing to participate in academic integrity programs and take a more rehabilitative approach.

The school ultimately decided against that. The school has decided the three-year suspension should stand.

Why the Delay?

On the surface, this seems like a straightforward case. If the reports are accurate, there’s little doubt that Shoko committed plagiarism.

Though a matching percentage does not determine plagiarism by itself, 45% is alarming. Couple that with the school describing it as copy-and-paste plagiarism of uncited sources. It’s about as damning as possible.

This is especially true since it was a PhD thesis. Shoko had been with the school (off and on) since at least 2009. He should be well aware of the school’s policies and what is expected of him as an academic.

In that light, the delay is abnormal, and Shoko agrees. In May 2024, he accused the school of using “delaying tactics” against him. However, he may have himself to blame for at least some of the slowdown.

By not testifying before the inquiry and then trying to handle the process through an attorney, he essentially short-circuited the ordinary process for such cases. As we’ve discussed before, schools are increasingly wary of being sued in such cases.

When schools face the threat of litigation, additional processes and oversights often arise. While students can and should hire attorneys if they feel their rights are being violated, they should know that doing so will often slow the process down. Academic tribunals typically move much faster than courts of law. Even without an actual lawsuit, such cases will likely move more slowly.

While over three years is still long, it’s not entirely outrageous. Given the path that this case took, it may have taken that long to go through the various checks and balances.

Bottom Line

The reporting does not indicate whether the school is starting Shoko’s suspension now or when the case was first filed. However, suspensions typically begin after the school makes the final decision.

If that’s the case, Shoko could have served his suspension and nearly received his PhD by now. Given the allegations against him, Shoko is lucky the school didn’t move to expel him outright, and even then, the school seemed willing to consider lighter penalties.

This is a situation where trying to fight the allegations and his approach likely made things much worse for him in the long run. If he had worked with his instructors, he might have been able to get a reduced penalty, especially if he had no issues up to that point.

While I often criticize schools for being overly aggressive when dealing with plagiarism cases, this case warranted a strong response. Shoko was not a first-year student, and this was not a minor transgression or likely accident.

Shoko’s approach to this case likely cost him years of his education and is a lesson that many other students should take heed of.