San Marcos Mercury | Local News from San Marcos and Hays County, Texas

June 5th, 2009
Texas State announces academic promotions

STAFF REPORT

Thirty-four faculty members at Texas State University have been promoted and 28 have been granted tenure in action taken by the Texas State University System Board of Regents.

The regents approved the promotion and tenure actions during their regular meeting held June 3-5 on the Texas State campus.

Promoted from associate professor to professor (with academic department in parentheses) were Brock Brown (geography), Dittmar Hahn (biology), Craig Hanks (philosophy), Karen Knox (social work), Kathryn Ledbetter (English), Lynn Ledbetter (music), Carole Martin (modern languages), Nico Schuler (music) and Karl Stephan (technology).

Promoted from assistant professor to associate professor were Bahram Asiabanpour (engineering), Lori Czop Assaf (curriculum and instruction), John Blair (criminal justice), Chad Booth (chemistry and biochemistry), Rachell Booth (chemistry and biochemistry), Janet Butler (accounting), Kyong Hee Chee (sociology), Christina Conlee (anthropology), Joseph Etherton (psychology), Cynthia Gonzales (music), Miguel Guajardo (educational administration and psychological services), Marian Houser (communication studies) and Sally Hill Jones (social work).

Also promoted from assistant professor to associate professor were Matthew Juge (modern languages), Benjamin Martin (chemistry and biochemistry), Pablo Martinez (criminal justice), Brian Keith Miller (management), Michelle Nance (theatre and dance), Sarah Nelson (educational administration and psychological services), Rodney Schueller (music), Thomas Simpson (biology), Victoria Smith (English), Taewon Suh (marketing), Miriam Williams (English) and Ani Yazedjian (family and consumer sciences).

Awarded tenure were Bahram Asiabanpour (engineering), Lori Czop Assaf (curriculum and instruction), John Blair (criminal justice), Chad Booth (chemistry and biochemistry), Rachell Booth (chemistry and biochemistry), Janet Butler (accounting), Mary Cavitt (music), Kyong Hee Chee (sociology), Christina Conlee (anthropology), Joseph Etherton (psychology), Cynthia Gonzales (music), Miguel Guajardo (educational administration and psychological services), Marian Houser (communication studies) and Sally Hill Jones (social work).

Also awarded tenure were Matthew Juge (modern languages), Benjamin Martin (chemistry and biochemistry), Pablo Martinez (criminal justice), Brian Keith Miller (management), Michelle Nance (theatre and dance), Sarah Nelson (educational administration and psychological services), Rodney Schueller (music), Thomas Simpson (biology), Dennis Smart (management), Victoria Smith (English), Taewon Suh (marketing), Donna Vandiver (criminal justice), Miriam Williams (English) and Ani Yazedjian (family and consumer sciences).

Email Email | Print Print

--

12 thoughts on “Texas State announces academic promotions

  1. Congratulations to the faculty!

    Does anyone at Newstreamz understand the definition of plagiarism? This was word for word lifted from the University News Service release. You need to at least give them credit. This is not a “Staff Report” It’s not the first time, and it is only a matter of time before you get sued for it. What ever happened to editorial integrity?

  2. Jesse,

    Does this count?

    Plagiarism
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search
    For other uses, see Plagiarism (disambiguation).
    Plagiarism, as defined in the 1995 Random House Compact Unabridged Dictionary, is the “use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work.”[1] Within academia, plagiarism by students, professors, or researchers is considered academic dishonesty or academic fraud and offenders are subject to academic censure, up to and including expulsion. In journalism, plagiarism is considered a breach of journalistic ethics, and reporters caught plagiarizing typically face disciplinary measures ranging from suspension to termination. Some individuals caught plagiarizing in academic or journalistic contexts claim that they plagiarized unintentionally, by failing to include quotations or give the appropriate citation. While plagiarism in scholarship and journalism has a centuries-old history, the development of the Internet, where articles appear as electronic text, has made the physical act of copying the work of others much easier, simply by copying and pasting text from one web page to another.

    Plagiarism is not copyright infringement. While both terms may apply to a particular act, they are different transgressions. Copyright infringement is a violation of the rights of a copyright holder, when material protected by copyright is used without consent. On the other hand, plagiarism is concerned with the unearned increment to the plagiarizing author’s reputation that is achieved through false claims of authorship.

    [1] From Wikipedia.com

  3. Scott… Jesse still has a valid point: professionally it is unethical(and just plain wrong & lazy) for newstream to use copy they didn’t write and call it “staff” when someone outside the organization actually wrote it and newstream just lifted the copy word for word. A more journalistic and professional approach would be for newstream to either a)give proper credit to the source–after all, that would be just as easy as typing in “staff report”…. or b) take the time to re-write the copy by your staff.
    Newstream can be a valuable news source for our community {and attract good ad revenues}, but to do so means being professional in all aspects of business operations, not sloppy like a student run newspaper might look. So, how about making this minor change in your site’s operation?

  4. Scott, I don’t see how your post absolves you of anything. “Use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one’s own original work.” Text you chose to quote. Newstreamz claimed that it was a staff report that was actually written by the University News Service. I’ve seen Newstreamz do this with other press release type articles, and maybe the original authors don’t care, but you cannot claim that it is your own work. Seven paragraphs don’t get copied word for word by accident. My guess is that you committed both copyright infringement (not getting permission to re-publish work) and plagiarism (claiming that it was your staff’s work). How hard is it to 1) get permission to republish the work, and 2) say “University News Service, reprinted with permission”.

    If you are going to publish your work, present yourselves as a news organization and claim to be professionals, then you need to be held to a higher standard. You should want to hold yourself to that standard.

  5. I’d just like to point out that “copyright infringement” is not applicable here, since media releases, by definition, are distributed by the source with the goal of as many media outlets reprinting as possible. For all practical intents and purposes, press releases are closer to public domain documents.

  6. I suspect that’s why they call it a press “release”. I have no problem with them being reprinted word for word. If they were changed and then became inaccurate, the same people would be complaining about that. People in this community need to be more informed about what is happening and this site is helping not hurting that.

  7. But the reality is we teach kids in school–including college– to accurately cite sources and not take credit for something they didn’t write…. so shouldn’t adults set the same example? Especially those in journalism?
    That is the real issue—of course you can use a press release word for word–but don’t say it is a “staff report” when it isn’t! How difficult is that? Just tell the TRUTH and say “press release from xyz”. Easy solution, right? Disagree? Give ONE good reason not to do it. {Hint: there aren’t any!}

  8. Thanks, Jayme, for your sensible and intelligent contribution to this otherwise silly discussion. A couple posters might be surprised to learn that Jayme is a public information specialist for University News Service.

    With apologies to our more sophisticated readers, for whom an explanation is unnecessary, I will go through this slowly.

    University News Service is a community relations arm of Texas State that produces, among its works, items that have been known for generations as “press releases.” Such are called “press releases” because they are, literally, “released” to the “press” with the hope that the information will be disseminated to the public through the mass media. Not only did we not “lift” this story from the university’s web site, but University News Service was kind enough to email the piece to us specifically so we would publish it. Thus, allegations of “plagiarism” in connection with the use of press releases are not well urged.

    We are happy to receive press releases and we invite them from any group wishing to publicize its performances. In fact, we cheerfully receive them from the cities, the school districts, local businesses and the county government. As we can’t possibly be everywhere with our own people, part of our operation involves actively soliciting such information from those who wish to provide it, so we can make it accessible to the general public.

    As Jayme mentioned, such releases are, for practical purposes, public domain documents. Their authorship is not a copyright issue. As it happens, in this age of the Internet, entities now have their own publications (known as “web sites”) on which they publish their press releases. However, the fact that such entities have their own publications for their press releases does not change the general nature of press releases, which are, nonetheless, as always, “released” for publication by the “press.”

    Generally speaking, we re-write the releases so they will comform to our voice and style, In many cases, we will determine that the most important facts contained within press releases are such that some piece needs to be re-organized. At times, we add background information to such a piece so the new information will be contextualized for the unfamiliar reader. When we’re really working well, we do a lot of that. Quite often, these pieces don’t resemble their original form when we have finished with them. A “Staff Report” is, at least, a re-writing of a press release, which means the piece we publish was written by us and not the entity that originally submitted it. In the case of this piece, the information consists of two lists, so we just presented the information as it came to us.

    It is understood by everyone involved that we are as free as the birds to do as we will with the press releases. As these pieces are solicited through and processed by our staff, it is more than appropriate that we follow the convention of thousands of newspapers for decades and credit them as “staff reports,” or something like that. We only by-line pieces that we have specifically commissioned from our reporters and other contributors. It is equally true that we produces pieces that entirely originate from within our staff and credit them as “Staff Report,” as well.

    I hope, by this post, to have made a small contribution to the overall reduction of confusion, which, as the very presence of this thread confirms, will never be entirely driven from this world.

  9. It’s very simple: They represented the work of someone else as their own. Period. End of story. There is nothing to argue about. It is a serious ethical problem, with a simple solution. Get permission to re-publish (which they may have had), and then properly credit the work (which they didn’t do). Easy. They didn’t need to re-write the article. Stories that come from the AP or Reuters are cited as such, as should happen here.

  10. Jesse, you are missing the point. It is implicit in the fact that the “press release” has been “released” to “the press” that “the press” has permission to publish it in whatever form it chooses. Press releases aren’t like dispatches from the Associated Press or Reuters, which are news services to which publications and broadcasters specifically subscribe with the understanding that they will be credited. I shall blow no more time on this.

  11. Bill, our posts crossed mid-stream… Even if you had their blessing to reprint the work, I stand by my point that you needed to properly credit it. I agree with Chris @10:15. You need to hold yourselves to a higher standard. With that, I am done…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

:)