#27986: — 06/10  at  02:42 PM
Where was Ohio State's human subjects committee on this
one? Proposing to teach high school students patently false things should have kept this from even leaving the starting gate.

#27987: — 06/10  at  02:42 PM
I thought it had been established though that there weren't exactly any standards of education to which children were entitled, such that schools (or possibly individual teachers) could be held accountable for ruining their education. I don't recall the case but I'm fairly certain it was a US one mentioned within the last few months and possibly even on this blog (but could have been on the BBC MBs or a couple of other places).

#27988: Orac — 06/10  at  02:56 PM
As someone who graduated from the University of Michigan for both undergrad and medical school, I have to restrain my temptation to enjoy a little schadenfreude at the discomfiture of U. of M.'s main rival. However, you're right. It's absolutely inexcusable to try to manipulate the process by which Ph.D.'s are granted this way.

#27993: — 06/10  at  04:16 PM
The deck stacking is a scandal, but shouldn't any candidate be allowed to offer any research at all and defend it?

If he cannot provide a satisfactory defense, then no degree, but there seems to be some confusion about whether he should be allowed to conduct wildhaired research.

I've never heard of an American university refusing to grant a degree when the candiate got to the defense stage, but I know it happens in Europe.

Berkeley granted a Ph.D. in quack medicine some years back and, except for a few paragraphs in Skeptical Inquirer, apparently no one complained.

#27996: Alon Levy — 06/10  at  04:31 PM
Sorry for going off-topic...

Harry: if American universities always grant a degree when the candidate completes the defense, then what's the point of having a defense in the first place?

#27997: coturnix — 06/10  at  04:43 PM
Oh no. I personally know people (in the USA) who, after toiling for years, failed the defense (after publishing several papers, etc.). Sorry, no PhD. Devastating but true.

#27998: coturnix — 06/10  at  04:45 PM
Hmmmm....I am going to propose to teach IDC to my lab animals and see if the IACUC will let me or if they consider that animal torture!

#28001: PZ Myers — 06/10  at  04:56 PM
Yes -- I know some who failed, too. However, I don't know of any who failed the oral defense. I've seen one defense that was shockingly bad, and I was sure the person had failed...but she passed, and I was told that they simply don't allow the defense to get to the stage of the final oral defense if the work is worthless.

Leonard is nothing unusual in that sense. He's doing sub-standard work, and he's going to get stopped in his tracks. The disgraceful thing here is that his committee allowed him to get this far without administering many needed corrections.

#28009: Vavoom — 06/10  at  05:33 PM
Stacking qualifying exam committees is all too common. I've seen several bright graduate students fail, merely because the deck was stacked against them. Often, faculty can simply write a negative evaluatory letter and request a difficult committee for their student. It's a rather convenient way to dismiss a disliked student.

This is a fabulous blog. I just found it and I'm already a fan.

#28014: Orac — 06/10  at  06:44 PM
It is true that Ph.D. candidates sometimes fail at their defense, but it is pretty uncommon, at least in the institutions where I've been and (from what I understand) in most U.S. institutions. To have Ph.D. candidate fail at his or her defense is considered a huge embarrassment to whatever department the graduate student is from and a failure of the thesis committee overseeing the student's work. In the U.S., Ph.D. thesis committees usually will not let a student defend his or her thesis unless they are pretty darned confident that the student is ready and the defense will be successful. Students clearly not making the cut are usually eased out in other ways--before they ever make it to a thesis defense. Sometimes their advisors will decide that they no longer have enough grant money left to support their stipend.

There was one student who actually failed his defense while I was in graduate school, and it was a big deal, with repercussions that lasted after I finally defended my thesis. Bottom line, if a Ph.D. student fails his or her thesis defense, it is often the fault of the thesis committee, which either let him defend too early or did not give sufficient guidance and correction to make sure the student was ready to defend.

#28025: — 06/10  at  09:24 PM
This is definitely something that should have been stopped at the thesis proposal level. I'm a little amazed it's gotten this far, but I guess a stacked committee can do that.

#28026: — 06/10  at  09:36 PM
I've been a grad student twice at a particular California university, many years apart. The first time, I got caught in the middle of a transition of my grad program from an emphasis on written qualifying exams (all of which I had passed) to greater weight on the oral exam. I got the worst of both worlds. I might have made it past the ramped-up orals anyway (I'm not completely incompetent), except that my committee chair decided to let the outside member of my committee (four profs from the dept, one from outside [who really didn't want to be there]) run off on his favorite topic, concerning which I knew very little. It was not pretty and the aftermath was quite unpleasant and contentious. My bad attitude about it certainly didn't help. (Nor did it really help that my department chair said that my only real problem was my committee.)

When I returned to grad school a few years ago, I paid a lot more attention to the composition of my committee. Everyone knew my field of endeavor and we stayed on topic, even though the committee members came from two different universities and three different (but related) departments. It was a nice change. Unlike Mr. Leonard, however, I didn't go shopping for faculty buddies from other departments on campus. Both my orals committee and my dissertation committee had majority representation from my major department. I imagine OSU is going to hold to that requirement in Leonard's case, too, which is bad news for him.

#28035: David Heddle — 06/11  at  04:10 AM
You people are such losers it boggles the mind.

I see on the Inside Higher Ed article that some faculty objected to the idea that Ohio State appeared to be on the verge of awarding a Ph.D. for work questioning evolution. Well sure, who would want grant a Ph.D. thesis that did not conform to accepted dogma?

All one has to do is look on here and PT to understand another possible reason why Leonard broke the rules to set up a committee. It was not to stack the deck, but to avoid faculty who had already made up their minds.

PZ wrote "He's doing sub-standard work", but I see no analysis of Leonard's thesis anywhere. How do you know it is substandard? Is it just because of the topic? Any you wonder why he wanted to avoid troglodytes like you? Would you have sought ought committee members who already decided that you should fail?

It seems more plausible to me that Leonard did not seek a rubber-stamp committee, but one that would give him a fair reading. Committee members who had not already decided, sight unseen, that his work was substandard.

Tony B wrote: "I paid a lot more attention to the composition of my committee." Scandalous!

I do enjoy your combination of elitism, arrogance, anti-intellectualism and fundamentalism. You guys are the gift that keeps on giving.

#28043: — 06/11  at  09:48 AM
David Heddle:

Tony B wrote: "I paid a lot more attention to the composition of my committee." Scandalous!

Goodness gracious! I've been quote-mined! How inconvenient that placing things in context invalidates one's supposed point!

Me:

Unlike Mr. Leonard, however, I didn't go shopping for faculty buddies from other departments on campus. Both my orals committee and my dissertation committee had majority representation from my major department.

#28049: — 06/11  at  10:41 AM
Proposing a program of science education based on non-scientific concepts IS prima facie evidence of doing "substandard work". He was obviously ignoring actual DATA that invalidated his thesis.

#28068: — 06/11  at  02:46 PM
What can you do if you fail your defence? Can you appeal? Do some more work in the area you failed in, and try again? Start all over from the beginning? Or are you cast forever from academe's light and airy halls?

Just idle curiosity from a mere National Diploma holder.

#28078: — 06/11  at  05:00 PM
I'm sure it depends on the institution. At my school, the Office of Graduate Studies is the final arbiter on all disputes (barring actual litigation, which I suppose could occur, but I've never heard of).