Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 4 of 5 · from the scan, no model involved
ten in iodo oy one ueorge ^ W. Kendall, and a later work prepared in 1$78 on the occasion of the institute's 50th anniversary.
Hamel had properly listed both sources in his lengthy bibliography at the end of his paper, but he had failed to indicate by quotation marks, footnotes or other academically acceptable devices that the words in his text were other than his own.
Informed of the possible plagerization by the Richmond Times Dispatch, the university promptly made a preliminary inquiry into the charge. The investigating committee concluded that I)r. Hamel had, “presented as his own work...material that was taken from existing sources." It recommended the convening of a hearing committee (to make a more formal probe of the allegation.
Word of the preliminary finding reached the Community College Hoard while it was meeting in Richmond. Astonishingly, after receiving this information, , the board reportedly voted, at the same meeting, to give Dr. Hamel a S-ib.000 to $50,000 expense account in addition to his consultant's feel
Then, in February 19S0. the hearing committee issued its final report. It amounted to an accusation of academic larceny:
"We. the members of the Hearing Committee find clear and convincing evidence to conclude that considerable portions of Dr. Dana B. Hamel's dissertation, A History of the Ohio Mechanics Institute, are substantially similar and without sufficient attribution to previously existing source material. We find that, in writing the dissertation. Dr. Hamel appropriated literary passages, ideas and language from the works of others without sufficient attribution causing those passages, ideas and language to appear as his own work.”
62.1%