Outcome Letter from Senate Student Conduct Committee

APPEAL LETTER OVER ALLEGATION ON PLAGIARISM

Reference to your outcome letter dated 7th June 2021 containing the formal decision of the Senate Student Conduct Committee in respect of the above-mentioned.

First, let me acknowledge that I am aware of how serious plagiarism is. I am rephrasing that the late version of my papers was plagiarized specifically from the course hero- academic website. However, I would like to appeal my academic dismissal from the University of Glasgow. I was surprised, and I could not understand why this decision (“the majority decision of the Senate Student Conduct Committee is that you are expelled permanently from this University with immediate effect and that your Student Contract with the University is terminated in accordance with Clause 19.5 of the Student Terms and Conditions”). Despite my earlier submitted written statement in advance of our Zoom meeting and proves documents; paper (August 2016) having no plagiarism claims and my earlier submission of chapter two, "literature review" of my thesis, was twice checked and no plagiarism claim arose. Therefore, I was surprised by a 2020 allegation of plagiarism and subsequent dismissal from the university. For students in similar situations, seeking university dissertation help could provide valuable support. Consequently, I am writing to you hoping that I will be reinstated for my completion of studies.

I have contacted Coursehero to remove those documents which though they are not responding as fast as I expected, I believe that they are going to withdraw my documents from their sites. However, looking at my search on their website, I have evidence that the website lacks credibility, especially on the work it uploads and stored on their sites. First, it is evident that the plagiarism in my document surrounds

(https://www.coursehero.com/file/24443871/HOD16609-improveddocx/.), a document uploaded by Richard Tuck. The document lacks an upload date and no information on who he is and the name of the work / academic paper. Similarly, a general Google search for the name indicates that Richard Tuck is a British academic, political theorist, and historian of political thought'. Also, the paper seems to be about Open and Distance Education, specifically in Nigeria. Therefore, the evidence reveals that the uploaded document is far from my area of specialty. Also, while searching 'Richard Tuck open and distance education Nigeria,' there is no paper that is available on the same subject. Therefore, I can point out that Richard Tuck, who is perceived to write the paper, is actually fictitious and perhaps even a combination of many academic works out there.

Also, I have noticed that the upload ID, ‘albertb517’, seems to have uploaded about 502,066 papers which is impossible based on human ability. Therefore, I can conclude that the upload might be done via an automated computer program or 'bot.' The large volume seems suspicious, which proves that CourseHero is not a credible source to be comparing your work to, especially given the fact that we don’t have any actual full paper here, written by a Prof Richard Tuck. Also, since the start of my hearing, ‘albertb517’ has uploaded more than 31,000 documents which makes the site even more suspicious to me. Therefore, I believe that CourseHero can be trusted,

Also, there is an allegation of someone helping me with the work, which is not valid. The university rules are clear that when requiring a proofreader, they cannot restructure, edit, add, or re-write anything. However, I just want to prove that the reader only helped identify typographical, spelling, and punctuation errors, and they never helped in editing nor restricting my work. Also, before requesting assistance from a proofreader, I consulted with the university team, and I also instructed the proofreader not to alter the content or meaning of the work nor undertake a translation of any work into English. Therefore, I deny any allegation of being assisted in my work and editing by proofreaders.

Furthermore, since my earlier presentation of my work clearly suggested that the work was my work and was not earlier submitted to any other university for consideration, I would like for the committee to consider that based on "the University Of Glasgow Code Of Student Conduct" my work did not breach any of the plagiarism codes as provided under section 33.6.

Therefore, based on the evidence given, it is evident that I did not breach any of the "Student Conduct Offences" codes provided by the university. Therefore, I feel that these accusations are incorrect. Consequently, I would like the university to investigate further into the matter.

I pray that the committee be lenient and allow me to make things right. Many thanks for considering my request.

Sincerely,

Abdulkadir Adamu

Take a deeper dive into Metrics Indicators And Classifications In with our additional resources.