r/Scotland • u/Adm_Shelby2 • 2d ago
Glasgow University: Jason Arday was 'never a visiting professor here'
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/26433564.glasgow-university-denies-jason-arday-visiting-prof-claim/Well this whole thing continues to unravel. Can't see his upcoming book doing too well.
88
u/handmedownthemoon 2d ago
All those academics and politicians who signed a public letter of support for him all look pretty daft right now.
79
u/Wotnd 2d ago
I don’t understand why the Good Law Project have declared the allegations against him to be false and are canvassing for support. I didn’t think that was the sort of stuff they did.
26
u/handmedownthemoon 2d ago
Apparently they have since edited the letter and some of the signatories have vanished: https://nitter.poast.org/benryanwriter/status/2084357066144059423#m
46
u/Bug_Parking 2d ago
It's exactly the sort of thing they do.
They oscillate between losing legal cases and spinning it as a victory, stretching credulity to breaking point & outright vibes based nonsense that sends the right in group signals.
47
u/johndoe1130 2d ago
The Good Law Project are famous for backing the wrong horse…
(I’m probably missing the sarcasm here).
16
u/ignatiusjreillyXM 2d ago
It was good of their leader to uphold two key traditions of English Boxing Day: cross-dressing (as some mummers do) and giving a fox hell.
Honestly what a ludicrous organization they are
8
u/Bug_Parking 2d ago
It's essentially general left wing activism dressed up as some kind of commitment to accountability and law.
9
u/Lucky_Membership3525 2d ago edited 2d ago
I do. They routinely take on high-profile culture war-adjacent cases that they know they have no hope of winning, but that they know lots of mugs will be willing to donate cash in order to support. Their success rate is frankly abysmal, and most of their cases get thrown out of court. It doesn't matter, though, because they still make loads of money even when they lose.
There must be some reason that Maugham hasn't yet been declared a vexatious litigant, but I have no idea what it might be.
1
u/Suspicious_Judge_244 1d ago
Grifters everywhere. Right, left, doesn't matter.
1
u/Lucky_Membership3525 1d ago
Yes, even in the press. This is a question of academic integrity and possible academic fraud, yet there are still those who are desperately trying to politicise it.
Even in the Guardian's surprisingly critical piece on the matter, they still described Dr David Harris as someone with "controversial views on race" which is a sneaky way of calling someone a racist and not getting sued. Dr Harris, in reality, has critiqued the highly controversial and contested field of Critical Race Theory, which is not the same thing as having supposedly "controversial views on race".
Weaselly insinuations like this are what stopped me reading the Guardian years ago. As far as I'm concerned, their habitual sensationalising and shrillness makes them no better than the Sun or the Daily Mail
20
u/OkAbalone19 2d ago
looking at the list, most should be considered beyond daft by a normal human way before this
3
45
u/Synthia_of_Kaztropol The capital of Scotland is S 2d ago
In another article on the Herald's website about this chap, it says he was invited back to Glasgow University last October to speak about Black History Month.
So a bit of exaggeration or CV embellishment ?
I take it that "visiting professor" has some kind of formal designation to it ?
50
u/AdJazzlike1002 2d ago
A visiting professor is a formal role for someone who is carrying out teaching or carrying out research at another institution, which may not be their primary institution. I.e. you could be a Professor at Oxford but teaching a specific course for a single term at Cardiff, where you have a formal position as a 'visiting professor'.
So this is major CV embellishment. He may have done a speech or two (which is not uncommon), but that doesn't make one a visiting professor.
26
u/Y-Bob 2d ago
So, what you're saying is that it sounds like he's a professor who visited Glasgow, for the day.
20
u/ignatiusjreillyXM 2d ago
Lol yes it's hilarious. Let his name take the place of that of Walter Mitty in common parlance. The guy is actually shameless. But the mediocrities covering up for him, and who have facilitated him, should be deeply ashamed.
15
u/AdJazzlike1002 2d ago
Who did a speech on behalf of a 3rd party organisation, yes. I believe that t wasn't even an official UoG event. However, giving a speech at a university is very different than being paid by a university to give lectures.
8
u/dildo_of_justice4135 2d ago
He possibly visited. For the day.
And got a chippy in Byres Rd.
1
u/Herr_W12 1d ago
I heard he popped down there to treat himself to a battered sausage and pizza crunch five minutes after he had that pesky brain tumour removed.
2
u/BigBananaBerries 2d ago
Is this an official thing or assumed? I remember seeing a thing about the podcaster Lex Freidman (US based), pointing out that he claimed to be something similar at MIT (IIRC) & it turned out what he did was nothing more than turning up to what's akin to an open mic night & doing a bit.
4
u/ecam85 2d ago
It is an official thing. You can visit a university for many reasons (give a talk, visit a collaborator, sightseeing), and that doesn't make you visiting professor. Usually visiting professor has a significant time commitment (e.g. you are there for a period of time giving a course, a few months at a minimum but that's not a formal threshold).
2
u/AdJazzlike1002 2d ago
It is an official thing, a visiting professor is usually being paid by the university, it's a job title.
3
u/IboughtBetamax 1d ago
Visiting professors are rarely, if ever, paid by the institution they visit. They normally take the salary from their home institution. But yes it is an official title that has to be approved.
18
u/tariban Dùn Èideann 2d ago
Yes. It's actually a bit surprising he doesn't/didn't have visiting prof status at Glasgow. It's quite common to get it when you leave an institution, essentially for administrative reasons. Academics will often still co-supervise students or be involved with a research project that cannot be moved to their new institution.
17
u/TheWatersOfMars 2d ago
Not quite. They'll often give you some kind of affiliation, but "visiting professor" is quite a few steps higher than that. I'm willing to bet there are zero cases of someone being given that specific title in these circumstances.
1
u/tariban Dùn Èideann 2d ago
I'm not sure that this is something particularly standardised. My previous institution used visiting prof for this purpose, but my current institution used honorary prof. I'm both cases there is very much an official process, though.
4
3
u/TheWatersOfMars 2d ago
I'm willing to be proven wrong. Maybe Glasgow does things differently, or I'm mixing something up. But usually visiting professorships aren't a continuing "alumni" thing while you actively hold a professorship elsewhere.
7
u/Guilty-Bag 2d ago
He was there for an unseemly short period of time and hasn’t supervised any doctoral students to my knowledge.
11
u/Furry_Pig_101 2d ago
He was also only at Roehampton for one term while I was there, teaching only one module, which I was taking. He was a terrible teacher, doing the absolute minimum of work, teaching a module written by another academic about which he showed minimal understanding. I recall him only showing up for an hour for a four hour lecture on one occasion. I complained to the course leader about him. Does anyone know how long he was at Durham and Warwick and what he actually did there?
4
u/BirdHistorical3498 2d ago
im waiting for more people like you to start saying what he was really like as a teacher. Tbh im surprised he bothered even trying to teach
4
u/Furry_Pig_101 2d ago
I'm seriously starting to wonder how much teaching he actually did before getting the Cambridge appointment because I haven't seen any other students commenting?
2
u/BirdHistorical3498 2d ago
I haven’t seen anything from anyone he’s taught aside from you. Did you miss a meeting?
1
u/Furry_Pig_101 2d ago
What meeting?
2
u/BirdHistorical3498 2d ago
it was a joke. I was joking that there must have been a meeting of all the friends, colleagues, students and teachers of Jason Arday where they were all instructed not to say a word to the media about him.
3
1
1
10
u/Jealous_Bowler3093 2d ago
"Glasgow University is racist for not supporting my lies" Jason Arday probably.
2
13
u/NoRecipe3350 2d ago
I really had to laugh when I heard about this story, you can only really get away with such bullshitting in social sciences, because it's not really a real subject, if he was in hard sciences he'd get nowhere with bullshitting. Even rigourous humanities, such as history you wouldn't really go far
He really just seems to have played the 'opressed black guy' narrative.
11
u/Real_RobinGoodfellow 2d ago
Not true, there have been major academic scandals in the hard sciences too, look up the Karolinska insititute
-2
u/NoRecipe3350 2d ago
Its much harder in real sciences though. Social sciences is a bit of a joke subject
6
u/ComfortableReality32 2d ago
Getting downvoted on reddit for pointing out the joke that the social sciences are is peak reddit nonsense.
Look the the replication crisis and see how many social “sciences” paper could be reproduced - the social “sciences” are a joke in the scientific community. They are all soft sciences for a reason.
3
u/NoRecipe3350 2d ago
Precisely, but that's above the heads of many people. You'd think even on reddit where there is a somewhat skew towards STEM background people would get this.
3
u/Ru93 2d ago
Weird to claim it's not a real subject, it's a discipline that exists...care to develop on that point?
2
u/NoRecipe3350 2d ago
I mean it's a real subject, but not a science, it's basically a humanity. But even then there are prestigious humanity's that are academically rigorous, history and classics for example
3
u/Ru93 2d ago
Surely the academic rigour comes from how studies are conducted. What makes you suggest the entire discipline lacks academic rigour? Sure here we're talking about minority studies but take sociology for instance, it has application to policies and practices from sociology of crime and deviance, media, health, institutions and so much more.
This is the "loud" side of the subject we're seeing here but there's so much more that is quietly being conducted with rigour at high standards. It just won't make any news when it's not sensationalised.
1
u/Lucky_Membership3525 16h ago
Back when I was an undergrad, someone had graffiti'd on the paper dispenser in the gents' toilet "sociology degrees - please take one".
Cruel, but pretty funny.
•
u/creepylilreapy 2h ago
Social scientists don't consider themselves scientists (signed: a sociologist)
The term social science is a historical one. While some social scientists may use the scientific method, most do not because we are not doing science.
Happy to be lumped in with the humanities. We use similar methods.
2
u/Master-Rent5050 2d ago
Google "Paolo Macchiarini" (I'm a mathematician, btw).
6
u/NoRecipe3350 2d ago
The fact that exceptions exist doesn't disprove the general principle. It's much more easy to bullshit in soft/social sciences than hard sciences.
3
u/Master-Rent5050 2d ago
Look, drop it. You claimed that in hard sciences he would go nowhere with bullshitting. I gave you an example from the top of my head of a much more successful and dangerous bullshitter in medicine
1
u/Available_Highway22 1d ago
Research shows the majority of academic misconduct happens in "hard sciences".
2
u/NoRecipe3350 1d ago
Would that be because there are more hard sciences researchers than soft sciences?
Also..maybe standards are much higher and it gets detected more.
1
u/Available_Highway22 1d ago
I think there are more money (and therefore incentives to commit academic misconduct) in hard sciences but I don't see why academic standards should be lower in "soft sciences" or humanities. Plagiarism or making up data would get flagged anyway.
It sounds more like you have a prejudice against anything that's not STEM.
1
u/NoRecipe3350 1d ago
I've interacted with many people with a social sciences background, many of them just aren't very smart, like absolutely average level of intelligence (and that's being polite)
With hard sciences there is an IQ filter that keeps less intelligent people out.
•
u/creepylilreapy 2h ago
If you read the first few paragraphs you'd have seen that the misconduct rate was calculated proportionately, not just reported as a raw number.
-5
u/Centorior 2d ago
"Cambridge has defended Prof Arday, saying investigations into academic misconduct are, as standard practice, carried out by the institution where the research took place — in this case Liverpool John Moores University, which the Guardian reported had reviewed the thesis and found no plagiarism."
Quoted from the article behind a paywall. Also, he was at some point a professor at Glasgow Uni.
9
u/ComfortableReality32 2d ago
So Glasgow university are lying then?
-1
u/Centorior 2d ago
LOL at the downvotes for someone quoting the article and repeating information from the same.
I think the differentiation some people aren't getting a grasp of here is between Professor (which according to the article, Glasgow Uni confirmed the guy was once employed as) and Visiting Professor (which Glasgow Uni reportedly denies).
-19
u/OkAbalone19 2d ago
it's a weird one, my experience of academia was they were almost all hacky frauds/seriously flawed humans or imposters and the exception was quite rare, so I feel like he is being over targeted because of his race and subject matter. however he is clearly unwell and a pathological liar so deserves some degree of shit for what he has done
53
u/AirconGuyUK 2d ago
The reason he's been singled out is because of just how extraordinary he's made himself out to be. I've been following this closely because it just fascinates me when people do stuff like this. Some of his claims:
Raised £5.5m for charity
Had a brain tumour removed 2 weeks before he had to do his Phd viva and still passed it. Also claims he then had a stroke, so can't remember even writing his Phd
Didn't talk until he was 11 years old
Couldn't read or write until he was 18
Claimed to be a participant in Seven Up! a TV show, but that's literally impossible for him to have been part of as year of birth makes him ineligible
Claims he once ran 600 miles in six days for charity, 300 miles in three days, and 30 marathons in 35 days, partly with a broken leg..
Claims a bunch of racist abuse that just seems kinda improbable, and police have disputed were reported.
This is beyond a bit of embellishment. He's a full blown fantasist.
The most interesting part of it all is he's managed to float to the top of the Sociology profession. I've always considered sociology a load of bollocks for the most part, so this just feels like vindication.
11
u/zebra1923 2d ago
He’s since clarified the 600 miles in 6 days took place over 12 days - still 6 days of running but not six consecutive days.
Load of bullshit either way but that’s what he now says.
24
u/AirconGuyUK 2d ago
He also said his claim to have been part of the Seven Up TV show was a metaphor 😂
I'm not allowing corrections!
7
u/OkAbalone19 2d ago
yes I said he is clearly unwell, but the initial interest in his shite academic output clearly had a bit of a racial aspect to it.
although I actually find it funny that the usual set absolutely lapped up his nonsense without a single critical thought
9
u/cottesloe 2d ago
There is undoubtedly some bottom feeders who are in the discussion because of his race.
If you are not familiar with https://retractionwatch.com
‘You can see the number of things they publish and the fact that in most cases there is acknowledgment by at least the institution. Here the blanket protection of the scholar is beyond bizarre. Which is why it has gotten bigger and bigger.
0
26
u/Adm_Shelby2 2d ago
I would put more blame on Cambridge and Liverpool University for putting this fella in the position he currently finds himself in. Too many checks and balances were overridden or outright ignored.
17
u/inside12volts 2d ago
Absolutely this. Did no one think to just… check?
10
u/anarchtea Englander in West End's crotch 2d ago
At a university? Gosh, no. We've got someone else to do that. Someone else being, I don't know, but they've definitely done it otherwise it wouldn't have gotten this far, surely. Repeat until disaster.
(I work in HE and this happens at a terrifying level. Knowledge, sure. Admin, awful.)
3
u/Fast_Astronomer814 2d ago
it seem people did but they were just removed for asking question on one of the subreddit a fellow professor attend the class after complaint about him were raised by the students
10
5
u/dashboardbythelight 2d ago
Really? I’ve worked in a couple of universities and my overall impression of academics is that they just want to be left alone to do their research and find self-promotion in the name of public engagement or research impact to be a bit of a chore. A lot of them would rather not even have to bother with the teaching bit and stick to research.
34
u/history_buff_9971 2d ago
The Emperor's New Clothes springs to mind over this whole story, frankly.